Why cryptocurrency will kill private property

The very fact that a society (participants in a cryptocurrency network) can roll back any transaction or forcibly carry out any transfer, simply by switching to the appropriate fork, already signals that the private relationship of the commodity exchange ceases to be purely private, becomes common. This is a step towards the abolition of commodity exchange and private property in general.

How did commodity exchange evolve?

At the dawn of capitalism, with the dominance of the market of free competition, there was a net commodity exchange. Each owner of the goods on the market owned only his goods, which he could exchange, while the medium itself was not regulated by the exchange, it was built itself, objectively and independently of anyone's consciousness.

Since the environment was formed by the forces of its independent participants, the redistribution of property in such an environment was the norm. In addition to some local aspects in which participants in the exchange have already begun to consciously regulate the rules of exchange and redistribution - something to prohibit or allow.

Then came the rule of financial monopolies. The market became regulated as a whole: the monopolists who won the free competition established their own rules. In general, the formation of monopolies is a direct consequence of free competition, but we are often argued that these opposites are independent of each other. But while it is not about this.

Further, what happens to cryptocurrencies: do they destroy the monopoly? The monopoly of the strongest private traders who have concentrated in their own hands market regulators - yes. Monopoly in general - no. Now the team of all market participants has become a monopolist, a dictator of the rules of the medium of exchange.

That is, cryptocurrencies contribute to monopolization?

I think so far there are few who understood this. We advertise cryptocurrency and decentralized finance in general as a return to pure free competition. But this is not so, it is the opposite step towards supermonopoly and superregulation, but not private, but public. And I consider this potential cryptocurrency truly revolutionary.

This is the communist potential of the cryptocurrency market: all its participants can jointly set the rules of exchange in such a market and change them if required. This before nebylo. And every single participant in the exchange will have to comply with these rules, if the majority have established them.

But again, this technology can be used in a different way. For example, if only private banks are participants in a cryptocurrency network, then they will establish the rules of exchange in the network. And the rest will only have bank accounts and will not be full participants in the cryptocurrency network, which means they will not be able to exert any influence on the rules, they will only have to obey the rules set by banks.

But what about the possibility of fork?

Any participant who does not like the rules and who does not want to obey them, can fork or just create their own cryptocurrency, which is what happens.

But in fact, a private fork has little meaning. With the help of a fork, the majority is protected from minority encroachment on the common, from attempts by the private to steer the common. Roughly speaking, having made a private fork, we move to another world, and do not solve the problem in the existing one. Well, if this was our goal. But this other world can solve the problem of the source only when it replaces it with itself. And for this, the majority should already be in the fork, that is, now it should become common.

Here is an example: you can fork MySQL. What for? Suppose for some purely private improvement. But it will be only a special case, the original MySQL will not suffer from this. Private fork does not compete with it, it is a parallel world. And in order for this fork to take the place of MySQL, it will have to pull most of the MySQL audience (developers and users) onto it, but this will happen if the fork is better than the original or solves some of its fundamental problem. For example, MariaDB is an improved version of MySQL, which is devoid of Oracle's “patronage”; it is more dynamic and free than MySQL.

There are thousands of cryptocurrencies, it is true. But for any new currency, the price would be a penny for her if she didn’t claim for universality, that is, for the place of a central cryptocurrency capable of dragging the majority to her side. If the cryptocurrency occupies a specific sector - then again, within the scope of its tasks, it claims to be central to the majority. Over time, society will select the most appropriate solutions from this diversity, and it is they who will remain until their best ones take their place.

Fork is not a defense against monopoly in general, it is a tool for securing a public monopoly against a private one. It is impossible to impose something on society with the help of the fork mechanism, but the society itself can choose one or another branch for itself.

Imagine that you have made a fork of Linux. How long can you use it? Over time, your fork will become obsolete and you simply cannot provide support for the new hardware in it. And your fork will not be interesting for hardware manufacturers either, to spend money for it and create drivers for it. Because 2.5 people will use the fork. But if Linux is taken over by some private company and starts driving it in its own interests, against the interests of the community, the community will be able to fork, drag the majority into the fork and continue to develop this thread. In time, a private trader simply cannot compete with a huge community and will start to lag behind. This is such a kind of proof-of-work . And the fork is an attempt to break it, if we are talking about the same niche that the original and the fork claim to be. And that branch will win, which will have more users and in which more labor will be accumulated.

So what is the result?

So, the reason for the formation of monopolies is the private interest and free competition of such private owners. Competition is a fight. And in a fight there is always a winner, who after a victory suppresses the vanquished. The formation of private monopolies is a direct consequence of free competition. Actually, because they arose: capitalism of free competition over time became monopoly capitalism.

The state here only reflects, politically forms the situation prevailing in the economy, and does not generate it.

And if society as a whole wants to get rid of any private monopolies, then the only possibility for it is to establish its own public monopoly. At the same time, free source codes and the mechanism of forks are the means of ensuring and developing a public monopoly.

For socialism is nothing but the next step forward from a state-capitalist monopoly. Or in other words: socialism is nothing else than a state-capitalist monopoly, turned to the benefit of the whole people and so far ceased to be a capitalist monopoly. There is no middle ground. The objective course of development is such that it is impossible to move forward from monopolies (and the war increased their number, role and significance tenfold) without going towards socialism.

Remember these prophetic words? :)

The ideal of private property is when there is only private property, and the general, the rules of exchange, is spontaneous and uncontrollable to no one. Every private trader does what he wants within the framework of the non-subordinate exchange environment. Another thing, if this situation does not suit the society . Society wants to control the rules of exchange in their public interest . For example, so that none of the participants in the exchange was deceived. Therefore, society establishes social control. But with this it kills private property: now it will not belong to the private owner that he actually appropriated, but that the organized society will consider it necessary to belong to it. And consider it necessary to take away - it will do it.

Therefore, cryptocurrencies today provide good tools for moving towards the development of public property and the destruction of private from the very heart of the modern system - the commodity exchange. It begins with controlling the rules of the exchange environment and introducing the possibility of jointly deciding which transactions to be considered correct and which not. And the apogee of this movement is communism, when no one locks the doors and steals because everything belongs to everyone anyway. Nobody recognizes for others the final private right to something that he has appropriated, and at the same time everyone collectively equally disposes of all that society has.