Connect with us


Qualitative and quantitative parallels between Bitcoin and Protestantism.



“To foresee the future, one must know the past, for the events of this world have at all times links with the times that preceded them. Created by men animated by the same passions, these events must necessarily have the same results.” Niccolo Machiavelli, 1517.

In 2019 Tuur Demeester draws a parallel between the Protestant Reformation and the rise of Bitcoin. [1]. This parallelism, from a theoretical point of view, makes sense. During the Renaissance, a technological innovation – the Gutenberg printing press – made it possible to challenge the monopoly of a central authority: the papacy’s monopoly of faith. A part of the population under the authority of this central power decided to do without it. The Bible was printed and read directly by the faithful. Today, a similar phenomenon is taking place. A technological innovation, the Internet, makes it possible to challenge the monopoly of a central authority: the monetary monopoly of the central banks. A part of the population – the Bitcoiners – decides to bypass the authority of this power. They create their own currency and manage transactions themselves.

Knowing that today the economy and the market have become gods by their omnipotence in our lives, the powers granted to clerics (economists…) are immense, such as the power to impose their masses (speeches on TV sets…) or to denounce heresies (Bitcoin in particular…). Since 2020, central bankers (Lagarde, Powell, etc.) dream of becoming the popes of the economy and the market by taking control in an almost Soviet way (quantitative easingThe heretics are the Bitcoiners. The heretics are the Bitcoiners, who, like a Protestant nebula, are of the most varied, but have in common that they question this neo-popularity of central banks.

This article will be limited to Bitcoin as the other tokens, both economically and politically, are too diverse.

Geographic correlation

Note: The location of the Bitcoin nodes as shown in. [2] can be misleading. A node operating from one country may be hosted on a server in another. In addition, some node operators deliberately mask their true location with an IP located abroad. However, it is reasonable to assume that these practices remain sufficiently marginal that they do not invalidate the overall analysis. In addition, other networks with similar philosophies are distributed in the same way. [3].

Tuur Demeester’s intuition is proving to be empirically validated in the sense that the current data confirm his intuition, as illustrated below:

The geographical correlation in Protestantism and Bitcoin nodes splits Europe in two:

– Northern countries (Protestant, “frugal” …).

– Southern countries (Catholic, “chicharros”…).

If Demeester hypothesized that the Protestant Reformation is close in its foundations to the emergence of Bitcoin, the correlation between historically Protestant and Catholic countries lends credence to the hypothesis. Of course, in the 21st century it is not about Protestantism in the first degree (after the temple you buy Bitcoin…) but about.anthropology Protestant (Norwegian or Germanic of the “frugal” of Europe…).

Note: France is an exception because centralization around Paris took place between the 17th and 19th centuries. On the other hand, the “Huguenot belt” is similar to the nodes of southern France (enlarging the map of nodes). Finally the work of Emmanuel Todd [5] on family systems in France explains this distribution of nodes in France (family stem).

Why a node? If owning (with private key) a fraction of Bitcoin is within everyone’s reach, mining Bitcoin is since 2015 a job in itself. Between these two extremes, owning your own Bitcoin node (a copy of the blockchain) is within the reach of most of the population (via Bitcoin Kernel on pc or Umbrella at Raspberry pi) while requiring some personal involvement.

A lire aussi :   Emirates : fièvre Bitcoin et Crypto !

Thus, the Bitcoin node indicates that its owner is involved in the network, and this is true for a broad base of the population, making it a relevant indicator of interest in Bitcoin for a given population. Assuming that the price per kWh is 20 cents, the performance of a node. Raspberry pi with a maximum of 15 W for the whole year costs 26.25 euros. [(15/1000)x0,20x24x365 = 26,25 €]so it’s not a question of money….

This correlation is even observable in a country that historically has had territories whose anthropologies The Walloons/Flemish are very close to the Catholic/Protestant duality, as illustrated in Belgium below:

Figure 2: left map of Bitcoin nodes in Belgium. [Bitnodes]the map of Belgium with the dissociation of Flemish and Walloon.

Although the Flemings are not predominantly Protestant like their Dutch neighbors, their anthropology is very similar in its relation to individuality and responsibility.

Note: Given that atheism is de facto majority in Europe, a direct first-degree link between Protestantism and Bitcoin is irrelevant. However, there are anthropologies that are “tendentiously” Catholic or Protestant. Moreover, Jansenist Catholics were very close to Protestant anthropology, which is one of the reasons why this tendency was frowned upon in Catholicism. Broadly speaking, “Protestant anthropology” is liberal and decentralized, while “Catholic anthropology” is administrative and centralized.

All that has been said above is also valid for. Monero nodes [6].

To more finely measure the involvement per country in the Bitcoin network it is essential to calculate the number of inhabitants per node (like GDP/capita), below are the results at the international level:

Table 1: Bitcoin node density at the international level.

Country and dominant “anthropology”. Number of nodes Number of inhabitants Number of inhabitants / node
(density of nodes per inhabitant)
Finland – Protestant 186 5 522 015 29,688 inhabitants per node
Netherlands – Protestant 390 17 407 585 44,634 inhabitants per node
Iceland – Protestant 8 362 860 45,357 inhabitants per node
Germany – Protestant and Catholic 1 846 83 749 300 45,367 inhabitants per node
Singapore 134 6 209 660 46,340 inhabitants per node
Switzerland – Protestant 145 8 603 900 59,337 inhabitants per node
Luxembourg – Catholic 10 633 622 63,362 inhabitants per node
Lithuania – Catholic 43 2 731 464 63,522 inhabitants per node
Ireland – Protestant 61 5 176 569 84,861 inhabitants per node
Hong Kong 86 7 466 441 86,819 inhabitants per node
Sweden – Protestant 93 10 313 447 110,897 inhabitants per node
Czech Republic – Catholic 87 10 701 777 123,008 inhabitants per node
Canada – Protestant and Catholic 300 38 082 857 126,942 inhabitants per node
France – Catholic 532 68 014 000 127,845 inhabitants per node
Austria – Catholic 54 8 859 449 164,063 inhabitants per node
US – Protestant 1 846 331 449 281 179,549 inhabitants per node
Bulgaria 37 6 966 899 188,294 inhabitants per node
Australia – Protestant and Catholic 124 25 671 900 207,031 inhabitants per node
Slovakia – Catholic 22 5 452 025 247,819 inhabitants per node
United Kingdom – Protestant 252 67 886 004 269,388 inhabitants per node
Estonia – Protestant 4 1 228 624 307,156 inhabitants per node
Hungary – Catholic 29 9 771 827 336,959 inhabitants per node
Denmark – Protestant 17 5 822 763 342,515 inhabitants per node
Croatia – Catholic 11 4 076 246 370,567 inhabitants per node
Belgium – Catholic 27 11 492 641 425,653 inhabitants per node
South Korea – Protestant 75 51 709 098 689,454 inhabitants per node
Spain – Catholic 63 46 934 632 744,994 inhabitants per node
Romania 28 21 302 893 760,817 inhabitants per node
Russia 191 146 780 700 768,485 inhabitants per node
Norway – Protestant 28 5 391 369 192,548 inhabitants per node
Israel 10 9 408 000 940,800 inhabitants per node
Poland – Catholic 39 38 282 325 981,598 inhabitants per node
Japan 111 125 507 472 1,130,697 inhabitants per node.
Italy – Catholic 49 60 359 546 1,231,827 inhabitants per node.
Taiwan 19 23 451 837 1 234 307 inhabitants per node
Brazil – Catholic 41 213 445 417 5,205,985 inhabitants per node.
Mexico – Catholic 14 128 649 565 9,189,254 inhabitants per node.
China 145 1 411 780 000 9,736,413 inhabitants per node.
India 16 1 326 093 247 82,880,827 inhabitants per node.

Not surprisingly, the countries with the highest density of nodes per capita are of predominantly Protestant “anthropology”. Germany (4th) is in a special situation, as the majority of its inhabitants are Catholic and not Protestant (27% vs. 25% according to the 2010 census). However, Germany is Luther’s country and his ideas have spread much more there. Moreover, Germany is one of the “frugal” countries of the EU and, of course, of the European Union.anthropology Protestant.

A lire aussi :   Prévisions de crypto-monnaie, la Fed baisse les taux et abaisse Bitcoin & co.: Il vaut mieux acheter maintenant!

Switzerland (Calvinist), in sixth place, is even more concerned about Bitcoin, since one of its main economic resources comes from international finance and it cannot afford to “miss the train”…. This reason is also valid for Luxembourg.

As for Lithuania, since it was particularly affected by the 2008 inflation (12.8%), the desire for more monetary control may be an explanation.

As Hong Kong and Singapore are cities with a similar economic model (commercial port and financial center at strategic points in Asia), they rank respectively 5th and 10th in node density per capita. Again, anthropological similarities (which spill over to economics) are correlated with participation in the Bitcoin network.

The very Catholic Czech Republic is twelfth, which can be explained by the influence of Unitarianism (cf. Figure 1), as the unitary doctrine [7] Is very close to Lutheranism or Calvinism in its individual approach to religion. [8]. In fact, here too, it is much more a question ofanthropology of the Protestant type than of religion stricto-sensu.

On the other hand, Romania, having been influenced during the reformation by the Hussite current [9] (freedom of preaching, vows of poverty…), a doctrine less in line with what characterizes Bitcoin.

As for Norway (Protestant), it still has a lot of oil….

Note: The number of nodes has been queried several times between September 2021 and January 2022. There is no error with respect to South Korea, 19% of its population is Protestant….

Overall, the conclusion to be drawn from these data and correlations is that populations with special affinity for Bitcoin exhibit the following anthropological characteristics:

– Individual and autonomous management of their savings.

– Financial risk tolerance

– A limited taste for central powers

– A liberal view of economics (Austrian economics, Hayek…).

As for possible contingent characteristics, they are as follows:

– A financial industry to be maintained (Singapore, Switzerland and Luxembourg).

– A lack of monetary sovereignty (Lithuania, Ireland, Czech Republic…).

Note: China and India are the countries with the lowest node density per capita, you know why?

And digital in general

Digital technology, in general, produces dualities of centralization/decentralization and shuffles the issues of sending or receiving information. A outsider can, for example, upend the political environment of his country by using the internet as a transmission channel instead of traditional TV channels, as Trump did with Twitter in 2016. On another note, in France, Médiapart was able to propose, thanks to digital technology, a new type of economic model for the press, which has inspired many others (le Média, Blast, TV libertés, l’institut des libertés…).

A lire aussi :   Le Real Madrid lance des billets via NFT

At the time of the Reformation, the Church (or the local lord) could censor writings deemed to promote Protestantism, with penalties ranging from confiscation of the writings to excommunication and death. Today, the traditional media speak little and/or poorly of the Internet (but tend to adapt), and censorship can occur on the Internet (example: Avia law in 2020).

One of the main contemporary criticisms of the “mainstream” press (newspapers, television…) is that it is too concentrated and controlled (in France, some even speak of an oligarchy controlling the media). In the case of Bitcoin, the use of censorship and its sanctions are less strong because the diffusion of the ideas of the Bitcoin community compared to that of mainstream thinking remains anecdotal.

More generally, with digital technology, modern “heresies” are formed from the point of view of the more traditional centralized broadcasters and receivers (television, radio…). If Christianity has known many heresies from the twelfth to the seventeenth century, one of them has been particularly widespread, Protestantism.

Why Protestantism then? Two elements of the answer:

– Earlier heresies had not known Gutenberg’s printing press, so their spread was limited.

– The main claims of the Reformation were simple and more permissive than in Catholicism (read the Bible oneself, possibility of individual spiritual life…), which allowed greater accessibility and diversity (Calvinists, Quakers, Anabaptists…).

Note: It would be possible to nuance all this historically and theologically (Protestantism is rich and complex), but this would not necessarily be relevant.

The parallel between the assertion of a central power and the reaction to it is as follows:

Table 2: Parallelism of the allegations in a central power and the reaction it generates between the twelfth and seventeenth centuries and the present day (twentieth and twentieth centuries).

In the past Today Comment
The Gregorian reform makes the papacy stronger than the local authorities (lords). Central banks are stronger than states, a kind of “Bretton Woods reform”. The famous international (and corrupt) finance is analogous to an illegitimate papacy because it is too far away (geographically) or spiritually (corruption)….
More or less isolated heresy movements, such as the Cathars, the Waldenses, the Lollards (Lorllardy)…. Altermundialists of the web (blog…), hackers and makers. If the discontent against the power of “finance and banks” makes itself felt, on the other hand, in terms of organization, everything remains very vague, and that even if our contemporary alterglobalists have had the Internet (mass adoption) since the 2000s.
Then comes the Protestant nebula (Luther, after Calvin the others…). Then comes the Bitcoin nebula (Nakamoto and others). The currency issue with the Bitcoin blockchain trust and its proof-of-work consensus tends to unite the disgruntled (or those who have lost faith in the central power…).

Observation: Today, the cheapening of information transmission and reception (the Internet) has made it easier to find and create information at the individual level, resulting in a more peer-to-peer society than in the past (where it was more centralized). “Power” and “central banking” are not necessarily the same, but they share a common “central” character. Anti-globalization activists criticized the G8 for “centralizing” international leaders, or the “big multinationals” for being too “central” in the world economy. If these discourses seem to today Protestant pamphlets against Papists were cartoonish (and even comical), and could be so much so (they described culinary or sexual orgies in a Vatican of solid gold…)…. [10].

In this comparison, Bitcoin may be just one key piece of a broader “digital reform” (or “digital heresy”). Here the tool may be entangled with the claims (is the Internet the tool or the cause?), but it should not be forgotten that until the 17th century things were blurred and the separation between Catholics and Protestants was not evident [11].

Bitcoin in the world of ideas

The Bitcoin network is a carrier of new ideas, in fact if Satoshi Nakamoto does not talk about ideology or politics in his white paper (except perhaps when it comes to banking the unbanked) on the other hand the fundamental principles of Bitcoin are ideas in themselves:

– Decentralized network with no barriers to entry for its development (programmers), maintenance (mining and node) or use (holding bitcoins), where any censorship of the network (blocked transaction) requires the approval of the majority of miners.

– Pseudonymity straddling transaction transparency and user privacy (mixed transactions or on the Lightning network have altered this).

– Ownership without titles linked to the state, only the knowledge of the private key guarantees the ownership of bitcoins. In a way it is analogous to owning gold that has been hidden, this ownership is linked to knowledge of where it is hidden.

– A token issuance limit (21 million) that only the consensus of any network maintenance stakeholder (miners and node holders) could change, so in practice it is impossible to increase the issuance limit. While from a monetary point of view this policy is “metallist” in the sense that it is a finite value standard (formerly gold), this policy is also used as an ecological argument because it implies that the resource is finite.

Beyond these foundational ideas, Bitcoin has inspired contemporary thinkers, the best known example being that of antifragility (Nassim Nicolas Taleb) applied to Bitcoin which implies that the Bitcoin network reinforces itself (computer code, hardware…) as “shocks” occur (regulation, hacking…). It is even possible to draw a parallel between the evolution of ideas at the time of the Protestant Reformation and the evolution of our industrialized societies with digital technology. Bitcoin crystallizes these evolutions and this is perhaps related to the almost sacred character of money.

Observation: From the Babylonians through Napoleon to the present day, money has always been a matter of power.

In general, Bitcoin accelerates and/or amplifies digital-related developments reminiscent of the Protestant Reformation in the economic sphere:

Table 3: Parallel economic developments between the 16th and 19th centuries and the present day (20th and 21st centuries).

At the time of the reform Today Comment
The Catholic Church excludes heresiarchs, but is indulgent to sinners.

Protestants allow heresiarchs to form their currents (Calvinists, Lutherans…), but they are intransigent towards sinners [13].

The traditional economy is hostile to “original” companies (Facebook, Bitcoin…) but forgives (subsidies, tax breaks…) mismanagement to traditional companies (Renault…).

The digital economy allows “original” companies to try their luck, but without subsidies or money printing.

It should be remembered that companies that are now established in the economic landscape (GAFAM…) have not always been so, in addition to having often been the subject of ridicule at their launch (Facebook’s listing in 2012 [12]).
All this can be similarly expressed at the level of the individual (savings, financial aid, private keys…).
From the denunciation of corruption, Protestantism advocates relative austerity (especially in Calvinism), this allows a greater accumulation of capital, an element that has greatly favored the Protestant sphere (and capitalism in general) economically. Thus, Protestant theology (apart from the Anabaptists) values economic success while cautioning against pomp and luxury. [13]. On denouncing monetary abuses by central banks (quantitative easing), Bitcoiners advocate a measured management of their wealth (DCA, savings planning…). To say that the Bitcoiners’ “doctrines” give an economic advantage is an understatement…. However, one cannot yet speak of the advent of a new regime of production like capitalism between the 16th and 19th centuries. Perhaps a new ascendant class is emerging like the bourgeoisie in the past, the advent of the crypto-bourgeoisie/gentre?

Observation: The FIRE (financialy independent retired early) movement, although not related to Bitcoin, is very close to Bitcoiners in terms of asset management.

Protestantism advocates a return to the original scriptures (Old and New Testaments) without regard to additions a posteriori (biblical canons written over several centuries by the Catholic Church). Bitcoin’s economic principles can be traced back to basic economic principles (value standard, finite number of tokens with no quantitative easingIn short, Bitcoin’s economic principles go against the trend of recent economic theories (Keynes, MMT…). In short, Bitcoin’s economic principles go against the trend of recent economic theories (Keynes, MMT…). At the time of the Reformation, the return to biblical sources was partly motivated by the loss of confidence in the papal institution (indulgences, corruption…).
Today, interest in Bitcoin is often linked to the loss of confidence in banking institutions (limited limits, remuneration of savings below inflation…).
The pillars of Protestantism advocate reading the Bible oneself, mass in the local language and having a personal relationship with God.
In the Calvinist dogma of predestination, hard work is the necessary, but not sufficient, condition for being perhaps among the electi (those who go to heaven).
Bitcoin supporters defend the “don’t rely on verifying and a personal relationship with savings (“stack sats”, “not your keys, not your bitcoins”).

Among Bitcoiners, principles such as the stacking saturation or the hodl guarantees that it is possible to be among those who will be economically independent.

In both cases it is a matter of excluding a trusted third party in addition to individualization.

As for neo-Calvinism, even if the starting level of wealth favors the wealthier, they must be rigorous.

Whether it is the bitcoiners of today or the protesters of the past, it is always about the abuse of central power and individual responsibility. If these events today affect the economy and not spirituality, it has to do with the fact that the economy is almost sacred (at least in the West) and affects all aspects of our lives, increasingly to the exclusion of others.

As for the industrial part:

Table 4: Parallel industrial evolution between the 16th and 19th centuries and recent times (20th and 21st centuries).

At the time of the reform Today Comment
Unlike Lutheranism, Calvinism, in order to lead a godly life, adds a rational dimension to its practice.

For example, Calvin’s asceticism (austere way of life) was justified on both moral and rational grounds (saving to reinvest more…). Whereas Luther’s asceticism was exclusively moral. [13].

Similarly, in Puritan communities strongly influenced by Calvin (Benjamin Franklin in particular), tables of sins, progress and temptations were drawn up with the aim of improving oneself as a Christian.

In the Bitcoin sphere, the relationship with Bitcoin can be handled very rationally by some (Pierre Noizat, Sébastien Gouspillou, Yorick De Mombynes, Richard Détente…), while others focus on more fundamental ideas of privacy (Cypherpunk…). Our neo-Calvino could be Nassim Nicolas Taleb, who advocates a rationalization of life.

Regarding the improvement tables, it seems that modern practices (especially in marketing and entrepreneurship…), there are even declinations of this system in the digital world (comments Blablacar o Airbnb).

If the nomenclature of the “Bitcoiner rationalists” (the Bitcoin Calvinists) remains unclear, in the field of French video artists (or others), it is clear that there are figures who are no longer satisfied with the great principles of defending individual freedoms, but also think about ecology (Gouspillou’s “economic battery”), balance the relationship between public services and currencies (De Mombynes) or reflect on the links between thermodynamics and economics (Pierre Noizat, Jean-Marc Jancovici or François Roddier). In terms of international influence, Nassim Nicolas Taleb is the closest to a neo-Calvin.

Moreover, his concept of antifragility is close to the necessity of “shocks” advocated by Hayek, just as Calvin had discovered the predestination of St. Augustine (Augustine of Hippo).

According to Max Weber, Calvin’s predestination (taken up above all by the Puritans) paved the way for Taylorism in the 17th century, since the consequence of the specialization of tasks was considered theologically positive (more efficiency = more glory for God or altruism…). Being up to date (with the state of the art) at the professional level could be favored by digital technology, as information circulates faster. This is a big issue that seems complex nowadays, as Harari puts it in 21 lessons for the 21st century.

This also applies to Bitcoin, because although it is not mandatory to follow the. (Segwit, Taproot…). as well as the ecosystem (the Lightning network, BTCPay server…) bitcoiners are also encouraged to upgrade.

If the specialization of tasks seems obvious to us, it has not always been so. In fact, in the history of mankind, it has been the exception, except in very specific conditions (slavery).

Just as between the 17th century and today the unthinkable was made possible through theology, digital practice perhaps makes it possible to update oneself professionally throughout one’s life. Just as Taylorism created disorders (Charlie Chaplin’s Modern Times), continuous professional updating may produce disorders (of the personality in particular).

If Luther’s reform demands were initially simple from a political point of view, the consequences went much further (Wars of Religion, United Provinces, Treaty of Westphalia…). A more accurate way of looking at it is that Luther was only the trigger for deeper changes. Today, could Bitcoin be the trigger for deeper changes?

Finally, the ideological part:

Table 5: Parallel ideological evolution between the. 16th and 19th centuries and recent period (20th and 21st centuries).

At the time of the reform Today Comment
Some transformations in the course of the Protestant Reformation departed radically from Luther’s fundamentals (Bible reading, individual relationship with God…).
Benjamin Franklin was a Protestant of Puritanism (tinged with Calvinism) and his writings on thrift (mixed with moral writings) are far from Luther’s theses.
Similarly, with Adam Smith’s duty to be selfish. [13, 14 et 15].
Between cypherpunk pioneers, nebulous libertarianism, pure (alleged) speculators and concerned savers, the motivations behind Bitcoin are vast [16]

The Bitcoin sphere is already in full mutation, including some currents away from the original spirit, it seems that it is even possible to deposit bitcoins in banks in Germany, ie. [17]

The “betrayal of the original spirit” is not new, and we could also speak of it for Catholicism, communism and even contemporary capitalism fueled by money printing.

With the Bitcoin everything moves faster, changes are faster and could make it face possible contradictions sooner. In this sense, the speed of Bitcoin’s development is not necessarily an advantage.

In “The Pilgrim’s Journey. (The pilgrim’s progress from this world to the next). by John Bunyan, an important work of Protestant literature published in 1678 in England, the hero, dressed as a knight, is portrayed melioratively in certain passages (valley of humiliation, fair of vanities…). On the other hand, the satire “Don Quixote”, published between 1605 and 1615 in Spain, offers a pejorative and ridiculous image of the knight as a relic of the past that is out of its time.
If in the Catholic world (in Spain in this case) the figure of the knight was ridiculed at the beginning of the seventeenth century, on the other hand, in the Protestant world, until the end of the seventeenth century, the figure of the knight was still seen in a very positive light.
In the neo-Protestant world of Bitcoin, the entrepreneur is still viewed positively, while among the neo-Catholics of central banking, money printing has tarnished their shield a bit…. In the 20th century, in the Protestant world, the prospects of a “gentleman” (in the sense of Bunyan’s book) flourish, while among Catholics one wonders what they are for.

The same is true of economics, with disruptive entrepreneurship on the one hand. (Ledger, ACINQ…), on the other hand the bullshit entrepreneurshipThe “connected crap” of the fiat world whose usefulness we can question.

PS: In France we have Captain Fracasse (a nobleman turned strolling comedian…) but this time the reasons are more economic and social than religious… I leave it to you to deduce who are the “neo-Fracasse”…

Until recently, Bitcoiners were still seen by some economic commentators as a sect of fanatics, but (as since the beginning of humanity) they are nothing more than a new group of humans who diverge in opinions and practices.

When a social group engaged in a developing activity (the entrepreneurs of the 17th century or the Bitcoiners of today) finds an ethic that shapes life and provides deep motivations, it receives an extraordinary boost when this ethic leads to a lifestyle that gives economic activity its maximum meaning and effectiveness: then the group in question tends to become a social class…. But what will the maximalist Bitcoiners achieve?

In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value. If there were, the government would have to outlaw their holding, as was done in the case of gold …. The financial policy of the welfare state demands that there is no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. This is the secret of the welfare statists’ diatribes against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the “hidden” confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It sets itself up as a protector of property rights. – Alan Greenspan, Gold and Economic Freedom [18].

* * *

Notes and references :

[1] French translation of the Adamant Research report, by Tuur Demeester.

[2] (access from September 2021 to January 2022)

[3] Here and there are maps of the spatial distributions of Monero nodes, Tor nodes, Helium routers, and Prusa 3D printers. Does this kind of spatial distribution look familiar? It’s the old Rhineland space.

[4] Wikipedia:

[5] Emmanuel Todd “The origin of family systems”.

[6] Constant inflation cryptocurrency (1%) offering untraceable (or very difficult to trace) transactions. Distribution of Monero nodes :

[7] Unitary 1:

[8] Unitaries 2:

[9] The Hussite Church:

[10] Protestant propaganda :
– Taylor, Philip M. (2002). “Munitions of the mind : a history of propaganda from the ancient world to the present day”. New York: Manchester University Press.

Bainton, Roland H. (1952). The Reformation of the sixteenth century.. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

[11] On the term “Protestant”:

[12] About the term.Facebook listing:

[13] Max Weber “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism”.

[14] Benjamin Franklin:

[15] Adam Smith “The Wealth of a Nation.

[16] The ideological divisions of the Bitcoin Revolution, Lionel Jeannerat.

[17] Bundesrat authorizes banks to sell and hold bitcoins.

[18] Translation: “In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from spoliation by inflation. There is no safe store of value. If there were, the government would have to outlaw the holding of it, as was done with gold….. The financial policy of the welfare state demands that there is no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. This is the miserable secret of welfare state rhetoric against gold. Deficit spending is nothing more than a ploy to hide the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It presents itself as a protector of property rights. – Alan Greenspan, Gold and economic freedom.

About the author

Thomas Mang, a former PhD student at CEA Grenoble, has been a photonics engineer since 2017. Passionate about digital technologies (3D printing, Bitcoin), he is interested in them not through the prism of “hard sciences” but of human sciences: history or anthropology.

Continue Reading


Copyright © 2017 Zox News Theme. Theme by MVP Themes, powered by WordPress.