-
If you have been following the news, you should be aware that the people of Lebanon have been under a violent bombardment that has recently escalated. Please consider donating to help them if you can or trying to spread word of the fundraiser.
-
Asheville and Western North Carolina at large are in crisis after Helene, please consider contributing to these local organizations and helping the people whose lives have been destroyed.
How Cryptocurrency Revolutionized the White Supremacist Movement
- Thread starter MechaJackie
- Start date
Like I needed any more reason to dislike crypto. Seeing these racists shitbags making money off this grift just makes me want to see this bubble pop once and for all.
my first exposure to bitcoin was its use in illicit purchases (drugs, guns, etc)
it make sense that some nefarious people made some serious $$$
it make sense that some nefarious people made some serious $$$
From WoW goldfarms to crypto, how the far right has been financing themselves all this years but still we get people on the internet just giving it a pass.
Also all things blockchain always have had that libertarian/far right stench... this kinda confirms it.
Also all things blockchain always have had that libertarian/far right stench... this kinda confirms it.
A lot of crypto BS was popularized by right-wing libertarians, right? So this isn't exactly shocking, at least not to me. It's not like I needed more reasons to hate Bitcoin.
Oh, of course. But like most libertarian projects, the substitute is almost always worse than what it was trying to replace. "Decentralization" usually just means recentralization into even worse (and more consolidated) hands.
A reminder that the point isn't that *other means* aren't used to enrich bad entities or commit crimes/perpetuate fraud - it is instead that this specific uniquely unregulated means is uniquely leveraged by bad entities *because* it has a distinct lack of regulations.
So yes, you can be bad using cash...but it's easier, potentially better business and appealing to a more malleable userbase to do it with crypto.
So yes, you can be bad using cash...but it's easier, potentially better business and appealing to a more malleable userbase to do it with crypto.
They have mindless people listening to them, believing their bullshit, of course they're going to take advantage and have them buy into this scam as well just to line their own pockets.
A bit of a reach in my view, but I know this site gobbles up any headline that fuels it's crypto hateboner.
Anyway, I bet the same argument could be made about anyone that invested in the neverending bull market in stocks in the last decade.
Also, If the right wingers made out like bandits, who is holding the bags? It seems non right wingers enabled them then by falling for crypto on their own.
Anyway, I bet the same argument could be made about anyone that invested in the neverending bull market in stocks in the last decade.
Also, If the right wingers made out like bandits, who is holding the bags? It seems non right wingers enabled them then by falling for crypto on their own.
Its a bad mix of intentional bad actors, a lack of oversight built into the system (good and bad) and a mix of anti-authoritarianism (which for many online folks turns into a hatred of the 'other' because they feel they are the persecuted ones) built into the idea of a world currency and embrace of racism as counter-culture which alt-right and bigot movements sell as the new cool.
As a wise scholar said, we shouldda never gave you motherfuckers the internet.
Agreed this story is dumb. They probably also invest in Amazon, Tesla, apple. Etc and made a fortune there also.
absolutely, I am certainly no crypto or blockchain expert but the benefits to 3rd world countries, or countries with unstable financial systems / corruption seem to be large. Also in the future if countries try and push towards the Chinese social credit model where they can impact your finances by wrong think , having a system of finance that is independent /secure and private seems beneficial.
Of course with everything there is misuse by awful people but I really feel like bad people always exploit things to their benefit
Exactly. Difference being, bitcoin is actually traceable or we wouldnt have this article. So much for bitcoin bad because only illegal things happen with it and nobody knows
OP
OP
I know you and other posters here are not posting in good faith, as none of you actually read the article, since much of it talks about how difficult it is to actually trace much of their money, since they also use other cryptocurrencies like Monero that are very difficult to track, and are using tactics so that they won't keep re-using wallets that have been associated with them.
Not to talk about y'all not mentioning the fact that the cryptocurrency community was started, and is largely populated, by right-wing libertarians, that needless to say welcome Neo-nazis with open arms, and are quick themselves to dismiss their partnership and close relations with them, as them just being "open for everyone". And so much of traceability when there are major donors that have been there since pretty much the inception of bitcoin, anonymously donating to White Supremacists.
Lol, that's a slanted way of looking at it. These people are also invested in the stock market as well. I'm sure a lot of shitty people made bank off the GME rise as well and other meme stocks. What can you do about it? It's just an investment in the end.
This is such a poor article. Bitcoin is an algorithm. It's code. It has no bias or political leaning. It would be akin to saying "the people you hate use math!". Yes, everyone can use it. Bad people use email, so is email bad?
Also, saying "Bitcoin started in right-wing libertarianism" is such bs. The people involved at the start (that we know of) were mostly students, professors, and generally people in the acedemic field like Adam Back.
There is are so many garbage articles on the right that come with the intent of stoking anger to make you hate something. Be it vaccines, masks, mail-in voting, etc. It's sad to see these on the left as well.
Also, using the line..:
"Bitcoiners will simultaneously deny they have Nazis (which they observably do), and also claim it's an anti-bitcoin lie, and also claim it's good that anyone can use Bitcoin."
..is a tactic these kinds articles use to try and immediately dismiss counter-arguments. The purpose of trying to get the reader to not change their mind when someone produces a counter-argument. It does so by pre-acknowledging the existence of this counter-argument and mixing it with poor ones while stating "the people who disagree with this stance simultaneously say all these conflicting things". You see it all the time on the right with vaccines.
A garbage article.
Also, saying "Bitcoin started in right-wing libertarianism" is such bs. The people involved at the start (that we know of) were mostly students, professors, and generally people in the acedemic field like Adam Back.
There is are so many garbage articles on the right that come with the intent of stoking anger to make you hate something. Be it vaccines, masks, mail-in voting, etc. It's sad to see these on the left as well.
Also, using the line..:
"Bitcoiners will simultaneously deny they have Nazis (which they observably do), and also claim it's an anti-bitcoin lie, and also claim it's good that anyone can use Bitcoin."
..is a tactic these kinds articles use to try and immediately dismiss counter-arguments. The purpose of trying to get the reader to not change their mind when someone produces a counter-argument. It does so by pre-acknowledging the existence of this counter-argument and mixing it with poor ones while stating "the people who disagree with this stance simultaneously say all these conflicting things". You see it all the time on the right with vaccines.
A garbage article.
OP
OP
Funny seeing so many cryptobros here dismissing an article about White Supremacists from one of the leading organizations fighting against White Supremacy and Right Wing extremism in the US. Much of what we know and have solid data on some of these extremists is from the Southern Poverty Law Center, and here we are with the cryptobros with bullshit "algorithm doesn't have political bias" claims lmao.
Yeah, that's kind of my take too. It's a good article, and highlights an issue we should be aware of, but it appears that not a single bit of counter-investigation has been done. Are there leftists - or even centrists - that are also profiting off of cryptocurrency? I've found several other articles about poor nations being able to leverage crypto to their advantage, and Nigeria is 2nd only to the US in bitcoin trading.
Out of control and rising: why bitcoin has Nigeria’s government in a panic
As leaders around the world grapple with cryptocurrencies, what happened when the African country tried to ban them?
www.theguardian.com
You should quote them instead of being passive aggressive about it
For a short but magical period of time it generated a lot of value for drug dealers
Correct. This is akin to taking down internet privacy because "the pedos use it".
I mean, these people are operating in regulated markets too. It's not like regulated vs unregulated is protecting them in any capacity.
Bitcoin didn't spontaneously appear out of thin air. It is not a universal constant, carved and immortalized into the very fabric of our universe.
Code is not unbiased. Code is strung together by people—human beings who can and absolutely do make biased choices every day of their lives, intentionally or otherwise. Code is absolutely political ...and that's even ignoring the philosophical underpinnings of the code in this case. If creating a digital alternative to fiat currency as a means of arranging a market outside of the state and it's ability to coerce isn't libertarian in nature and influence, then what even is?
Considering all of this, no one but your reductive strawman is "blaming math." What's being faulted is a platform and community that by nature sure made it easy for fascists to join in with zero consequences and get rich.
Last edited:
Yeah this, but I think one of the oddest things about this is that while of course no investment vehicle is exclusive to anyone dependent upon political alignment; the fact that someone can even do this type of research and connect the investments to the individuals is literally because of the public nature of blockchain technology.
These douche canoes likely own other appreciating or interest bearing securities as well but good luck easily linking it to them with publicly available information with as much accuracy as this.
Defending Nazis to defend your fake planet destroying monopoly money le epic style!
OP
OP
Except, you know, more than half the article detailing the many ways they manage to hide their money through different cryptocurrencies and wallets, and how some major donors are completely anonymous, and how even the graph shared in the OP makes clear that this is only money from a "subset" of "known" wallets that were associated to that person.
Those in power always have access to new ways to get richer first because of their privilege or access to materials, wealth, and technology. And it's why they want to keep it this way.
You say Era has a hateboner as if there aren't legit reasons to dislike cryptocurrency or bitcoin, and yet you (along with some others in this thread) sure have a trend of using whataboutism whenever criticism of it comes up so your cryptoboner is showing:
Last edited:
Im not sure why you are saying "except" when all you are doing is aggressively agreeing with me by confirming exactly what I said. They were able to find and link as much information here as they were in large part BECAUSE of the public nature of blockchain histories being accessible. They establish as much literally in the first line of the article:
The chart you reference doubles down on my statement by being transparent about where the information they are using comes from:
And I never said anything about donations. In any case, what I said is accurate, this article has the depth of information it has because of blockchains public ledger allowing them to find and track this information. And the ongoing legislation/regulation continues to further push methods of maintaining full anonymity (Monero/Tumblers) to the outside where it requires breaking the law to make use of them.
Speaking of things the article makes clear:
As well as:
All of which I agree with, even the latter, as I believe a lot of crypto is massively inflated pricewise due to the early unregulated nature of shady stablecoins and more.
All in all the article is pretty damn good and doesn't seem to screw up and get much wrong which is a rarity on crypto articles. It makes it pretty clear that while there are aspects of crypto that allow for some forms of identity suppression, at its core it is still built on the idea of publicly verifiable information, and its open about how that very backbone of the technology is what was used as a source for much of the information in the article.
Without the public ledger, the article likely doesn't exist, or it ends up being one big speculative piece devoid of concrete data.
Bitcoin didn't spontaneously appear out of thin air. It is not a universal constant, carved and immortalized into the very fabric of our universe.
Code is not unbiased. Code is strung together by people—human beings who can and absolutely do make biased choices every day of their lives, intentionally or otherwise. Code is absolutely political ...and that's even ignoring the philosophical underpinnings of the code in this case. If creating a digital alternative to fiat currency as a means of arranging a market outside of the state and it's ability to coerce isn't libertarian in nature and influence, then what even is?
Considering all of this, no one but your reductive strawman is "blaming math." What's being faulted is a platform and community that by nature sure made it easy for fascists to join in with zero consequences and get rich.
What a mess of a post. First of all I never said Bitcoin spontaneously appeared or a universal construct, ironic as you like to call out strawman arguments. Second, Bitcoin is a digital decentralized currency that uses a peer-to-peer network where transactions are stored on a blockchain. It's a mix of technologies. What technology in there exactly is libertarian code? The Internet (initially) took a lot of control and oversight away from the gov't, is TCP/IP a libertarian technology?
If the US government put in heavy regulation and forced all citizens to submit their wallet ID to the US government, the gov't would then have access to every transaction you made and would be able to inflict incredible influence and control over citizens. Would that code magically change from libertarian to authoritarian?
Technologies are just that, technologies. They can be used to impact political purposes, just like a sign can, a pen can, a sword can, a gun can...
Also, guess what - anyone can get rich from things like stocks too. Do you think Wall Street has a sign up sheet and doesn't allow facists to buy stocks? Anyone can join in and get rich.
But let's say for a second that you are correct , that Bitcoin is made up of libertarian code. You do realize that libertarians are the opposite of fascists', which are authoritarian in nature. So you are saying the Bitcoin developers made a platform friendly to facists, by writing code with values that are the exact opposite of facism's main value? Your argument makes zero sense. A mess.
You can throw around all the whataboutisms you want to defend that precious thing that made you a buck, but no shit Nazis among other groups love the added lack of transparency. And of course it ties into their antisemitic bullshit.
This is a weird argument though; there's been plenty of technology that is the definition of neutral but who's ultimate application ended up being abusive or worse.
Also, I think you miss the original replies point; the issue is that making a currency that has zero transparency has an ideology behind it, because that as a goal in creation has its roots in a certain political ideology. Its a defense for bitcoin that gets brought up all the time; it frees the grip of local currency from authoritarian government's. No one brings that as a reason TCP/IP protocols exisit.
And while yes, authoritarianism is not libertarianism does a piss poor job, as an ideal, of having political thought in place as far as 'brakes' are concerned when it comes to those views. Its why various libertarian movements are alt-right adjacent.
But we got sidetracked. Saying a piece of tech can be created in an unethical vacuum just seems naïve. Its a 'guns don't kill people, people kill people' argument. You can't own a small group of businessmen in a third world country using it to avoid government currency manipulation,
but not own how it seems to have helped accelerate shit like ransomware. And that's the issue with these discussions; since it ultimately involves the idea of capitalism, but for the people (lol) and made people rich the defense force comes out in droves as opposed to discussing the positivies and negatives of transparent financial transactions