-
@ Reed
2023-04-25 18:02:43Bitcoin maximalism, to many, has evolved from a belief that bitcoin is the only crypto asset worth owning to a belief that bitcoin is the only asset worth owning. In addition, many observe that those who declare themselves to be bitcoin maximalists have also declared their allegiance to many other lifestyle choices. This was well articulated by Jameson Lopp in his blog post “A History of Bitcoin Maximalism.”
While some (myself included for a while) embrace the title of bitcoin maximalist, perhaps out of spite given that it was originally intended to be a derogatory term, I eventually have decided to reject it. While I do not own any other crypto assets, and I do believe that bitcoin offers the best risk adjusted investment across many asset classes, it is not, nor could it ever realistically be, my only investment. Due to the ambiguity of the definition of a “bitcoin maximalist” to some, even the fact that I have equity in my primary residence may call into question my status as a bitcoin maximalist. Although most people likely agree that this point of view is nonsensical, I feel that it is also completely pointless to take the time to defend the purity of my “bitcoin maximalism;” and so, I reject it. In place of the bitcoin maximalist label, I hereby declare myself to be a truth maximalist.
The truth is that 99% of non-bitcoin crypto assets are completely worthless; specifically, what I mean is that they literally add zero net positivity to humanity. The remaining 1% of non-bitcoin crypto assets may indeed serve some limited improvements to existing systems or other alternative benefits; however, these crypto assets are also, in my opinion, already highly over valued given the magnitude of the problems they are intending to solve. Most of the incremental improvements offered by cryptos are related to marginally improving systems based on fiat money and the banking industry both of which bitcoin intends to largely obsolete and are still net negative to humanity and designed to syphon wealth from the powerless to the powerful.
I do believe that open source, decentralized, cryptographic solutions will play additional roles in society and offer an opportunity to disrupt many existing centralized solutions. However, most of these solutions will not be investable assets, just as the internet itself is not an investable asset.
I believe it also to be true that investment properties intended for yield generation come with a host of additional costs and risks that are rarely properly accounted for when assessing the value of these assets. After accounting for the probability weighted costs of evictions, seizures, taxes, maintenance, inflation, and loan interest, I find it difficult to justify these investments over bitcoin held in self-custody.
Many other investable assets that simply sit on a bank’s balance sheet (e.g., stocks, bonds, etc.) can easily be seized if any number of three letter agencies decided that you should not have these assets. This can be done with no due process and does not require any in depth investigation to determine the validity of their claims. I believe that the probability of these types of seizures is much higher for known bitcoiners who are also critical of the government and the media, especially if current financial systems begin to collapse and/or if bitcoin’s value dramatically increases.
Beyond seizure of your individual assets, as the world begins to divest from the highly inflated store of value assets listed on the NYSE and NASDAQ due to seizure risks at the sovereign level, the risk of extreme inflation adjusted devaluation of your portfolio should also be considered. Compounding this risk is the opportunity cost associated with the fact that some of the wealth that may be withdrawn from the US stock market is also likely going to flow into bitcoin. These risks are rarely accounted for or quantified when determining the value of a stock portfolio in contrast to simply holding bitcoin in self-custody.
My opinions on these matters are common among bitcoiners who are largely labeled bitcoin maximalists. However, the title of truth maximalist also fits nicely when trying to counter some of the softer points made in Lopp’s blog post mentioned above. My thesis is that most people who have adopted the bitcoin maximalist “lifestyle” choices have done so as a result of their quest for truth, not as a result of their desire to virtue signal their status as bitcoin maximalists.
The truth is that a carnivore diet is much healthier than governments, media and academia would like you to believe (disclosure: I have never tried a carnivore diet)
The truth is that weightlifting is more beneficial than cardio to overall health (disclosure: I am not into weightlifting)
The truth is that traditional gender roles are beneficial to mental health (disclosure: although my wife is a full-time, stay-at-home mom, my marriage is far from perfect).
The truth is that extreme consequences from greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere are extrapolatory and predictions have historically failed miserably (disclosure: I do not think there is zero risk of extreme disasters from excessive levels of carbon in the atmosphere).
The truth is that seed oils are terrible for you (disclosure: I have ingested seed oils since discovering this).
The truth is that COVID vaccines pointlessly add risk to healthy people and children (disclosure: I received two doses of the COVID vaccine prior to realizing this truth and my wife still disagrees with me on this).
The truth is that natural health solutions are often more beneficial than big pharma would like you to believe (disclosure: I have not used any exotic natural remedies).
The truth is that modern art and architecture is garbage (disclosure: this is only a personal opinion).
The Truth is that Jesus Christ died on a cross and ascended into Heaven in order to save the world from sin (disclosure: although I have always been a Christian, over the last year or so I have dedicated a significant amount of time researching this and so far, everything is supporting this to be literally true and much more easily believable than you might think).
Maybe you disagree with some of these things that I have determined to be true. But let me ask, have done your own research? What is your basis for a counter argument to any of these truths? Did you verify or are you trusting someone else’s opinion? If you are trusting someone else’s research, did you investigate their credibility or determine if they have significant biases? Certainly, my opinions on the topics listed above not always based on exhaustive independent research, but I did approach each with skepticism and did not always believe these things with conviction prior to looking into them. I think any bitcoiner would agree that if you are trusting fiat funded academia, government organizations or mainstream media, you may need to do more research.
The truth is that I will continue to seek the truth and I will encourage others to do the same. The truth is that I welcome new information and listening to opinions that counter my beliefs. When choosing to have strong conviction in minority opinions about the truth, it is extremely valuable to be able to articulate and refute the points that are contrary to your beliefs. It is also important to be able to change your mind when presented with sufficient evidence against your opinion. This is what it means to be a truth maximalist. It just so happens that the truth is that bitcoin is the only crypto asset worth investing in. Don’t believe me? Prove it.
786973