[HN Gopher] Against choosing your political allegiances based on...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Against choosing your political allegiances based on who is "pro-
       crypto"
        
       Author : bpierre
       Score  : 63 points
       Date   : 2024-07-17 17:13 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (vitalik.eth.limo)
 (TXT) w3m dump (vitalik.eth.limo)
        
       | Analemma_ wrote:
       | A great article which will go in one ear and out the other of the
       | people who actually follow Vitalik. The other day he tweeted a
       | pretty anodyne statement about how getting vaccinated against
       | covid is good, and was mauled in the replies by his supposed
       | fans. I imagine it's a special circle of hell to be an extremely
       | intelligent person whose hordes of fanatical devotees are all
       | some of the dumbest people alive.
        
         | m3kw9 wrote:
         | They are just in it because he is supposed to make ETH go up,
         | they care about TX costs because a lower one will make it go
         | up, more privacy..up. It ain't because it will convert the
         | world into a better place
        
       | cal5k wrote:
       | > Another important conclusion of this is that if a politician is
       | pro-crypto today, but they are the type of person that is either
       | very power-seeking themselves, or willing to suck up to someone
       | who is, then this is the direction that their crypto advocacy may
       | look like ten years from now.
       | 
       | Vitalik strikes me as being very naive about the process of
       | policy-making. All politicians are, _by definition_ , power-
       | seeking individuals. They're seeking the power afforded to them
       | by a seat on city council, as governor, a member of congress,
       | etc. This is simply the nature of the political process. They may
       | even be seeking power in pursuit of a noble objective, but they
       | are seeking power nonetheless.
       | 
       | Realpolitik as a non-politician means aligning yourself with
       | whoever best represents your interests at that particular point
       | in time. One election cycle that may be Party A, but in the
       | future it could be Party B. It could differ at the federal,
       | state, or local level. Frequent elections and term limits ensure
       | that turnover will happen, so change will be the only constant.
       | Flexibility is required.
       | 
       | Waiting for the perfectly ideologically-aligned candidate sounds
       | nice, but in reality it means you'll be waiting forever. All
       | politicians are flawed, and many will simply tell you what they
       | think you want to hear. Their behaviour is amenable to
       | incentives, however, which is why donations are such an important
       | - if maligned - mechanism for accountability.
       | 
       | Marc & Ben are being practical. They've observed that the
       | behaviour of one party has run directly counter to their
       | interests over the last several years and they're aligning
       | themselves with the party that is at least proposing a better set
       | of policies.
       | 
       | That's just... how this stuff works and has always worked.
        
         | demondemidi wrote:
         | You made up your own definition of politician to prove your
         | point. Thats fallacious reasoning. I was in politics for four
         | years not for power but to help people organize and prevent
         | corporate takeover of family farms. Get bent, dude.
        
           | mplewis9z wrote:
           | > They may even be seeking power in pursuit of a noble
           | objective, but they are seeking power nonetheless.
           | 
           | Think you might meet this definition, my guy.
        
           | lifty wrote:
           | You were endowed with power in order to pursue a noble goal.
           | But it was the power you sought that allowed you to do that.
           | I think he's definition is correct.
        
           | octopoc wrote:
           | Thank you for your service. I think it's popular to be
           | dismissive and say that all politicians are sociopaths, which
           | sounds very similar to saying they're all power seeking
           | individuals. The reason they sound similar is because there's
           | this idea that seeking power is always bad, but your example
           | proves otherwise. So again, thank you!
        
         | mcguire wrote:
         | "...counter to _their interests_... "
         | 
         | Very important words, there.
        
         | comfysocks wrote:
         | I agree that you sometimes have to pick you battles and have
         | allegiances of convenience.
         | 
         | However, my opinion is that an excessive amount of "selling
         | your soul to the devil" for short term gains is the root cause
         | of much of what is wrong in business and politics.
        
         | cocacola1 wrote:
         | It's endlessly interesting to read how people narrow broad
         | points.
        
         | olalonde wrote:
         | > Marc & Ben are being practical.
         | 
         | I assume you mean a16z but what are you referring to exactly?
         | They're not mentioned in the article...
        
           | cal5k wrote:
           | Vitalik didn't mention them by name, but given the timing it
           | seems likely he was referring to this:
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_sNclEgQZQ
        
         | nonameiguess wrote:
         | I don't get what you're hinting at here. The org Vitalik
         | actually links to here that rates politicians on being friendly
         | to crypto, rates individual politicians, not parties, and it
         | claims to have over 1,000 politicians in its database. When I
         | filter for only the ones unfriendly, it lists 49 people. If
         | this rating system is correct, it seems crypto is very likely
         | to be safe based on simply keeping the current people in office
         | in office. It certainly stands out that there are far more
         | democrats than republicans in the against category, but it's a
         | tiny minority of the overall party in both cases.
        
       | pimpampum wrote:
       | Vitalik is pretty based.
        
       | verdverm wrote:
       | I have (had?) a good friend who is in this group Vitalik is
       | talking about. They've actually lived with Vitalik and co-
       | authored posts with him. Cyrpto-culture changed him in ways I
       | find troubling and I hope this might bring them back closer to
       | the person they were prior to crypto corrupting their values.
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | The politicians who are pro-crypto were paid to be so.[1] Well-
       | paid.[2]
       | 
       | [1]
       | https://www.ft.com/content/63ad2147-0aa7-4e28-9cf5-6ce3ce7a2...
       | 
       | [2] https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2024/05/congress-blocked-
       | se...
        
         | beaglesss wrote:
         | That just tells me crypto proponents aren't completely stupid.
         | 
         | You must pay if you want a seat in this 'democratic' process.
        
       | cooolbear wrote:
       | So their politics on freedom and privacy of blah blah blah non-
       | cohesive ideology doesn't correlate with their actual stance on
       | crypto. A politician being pro-crypto _does_ , however, tell me
       | that they are dumb enough to be duped/greedy enough to be paid
       | into wasting time giving lip service to something that,
       | regardless of ideology, is actually completely worthless.
        
       | cyanydeez wrote:
       | Also keep in mind, wanting to crash america, democracy and fiat
       | currency are 'pro crypto' motivatrd positions.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-07-17 23:16 UTC)