For years, we have known that our government is spying on us, that the phones in our pockets and purses are literal homing devices capable of tracking our every move, even when turned off.
That’s bad enough, but the looming possibility of digital currency takes the war on individual freedom to a different level, creating a kind of communist control system beyond Karl Marx’s wildest imagination.
The specter of this possibility is all around us, especially now with markets and banks crashing.
This puts the imposition of digital currency squarely in the crosshairs of Rahm Emanuel’s “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”
Emanuel elucidated, “And what I mean by that is it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”
And what would that “opportunity” portend in the current situation?
With its digital, real-time ability to track every dollar spent by every citizen and consequently dictate where they could spend their now-digital money, along with the means to shut off the tap instantly should they disobey, the U.S. (or global) government would have a level of control that would make every totalitarian from Stalin to Xi green with envy.
Overstep your allotted carbon footprint? Bye-bye. Donate to a certain proscribed cause or religious institution? Bye-bye. And so it goes.
Combine that with Google’s proven mind-control capabilities and you indeed have a form of communism that’s light years beyond Marx.
It isn’t paranoid to say that, as time goes on, the average citizen would be trained via something eerily similar to the old Pavlovian method to forget the concept of individual human freedom altogether.
After all, the absolute necessities of life—food, shelter, health care—would be under even more government supervision than they are now.
Digital currency must be opposed at all costs, also because it will be, in the short term, seductive. As with other technological advances that also should be scrutinized, it offers “modern convenience” and will be sold to us that way.
ATMs and cash will disappear. No fear of robbery there. Tedious check writing will be a thing of the past. All transactions will be immediate (unless forbidden).
Even banks themselves will no longer exist, at least in their present form. Something similar to the blockchain will prevail. Again, how modern.
But don’t be misled. The banks, the chosen ones anyway, will still get theirs under a new structure. The only ones to suffer will be the employees, more of whom will be irrelevant and will have to find work elsewhere.
That won’t be simple, since the installation of digital currency will also portend the digitization, not to mention robotization, of more of society’s work.
Digital currency is a dangerous and significant partner to the increasing pervasiveness of artificial intelligence (AI) in our lives. This argues for the further dominance of machines (computers) over humans.
To verify this, I asked the man ... er, the machine ... itself at chat.openai.com.
My question: “Do you think digital currency is a good idea?”
Its reply: “As an AI language model, I don’t have personal beliefs or opinions. However, I can provide information and perspectives on digital currency.”
It went on and on, but I refocused, for computer-like specificity.
Second question: “Does digital currency further take away an individual’s control over their life?”
Its reply: “Whether digital currency takes away an individual’s control over their life depends on how it is implemented and used.
“On the one hand, digital currency can give individuals greater control over their financial transactions. With digital currency, people can send and receive money without relying on intermediaries such as banks, which can reduce transaction fees and processing times. Additionally, digital currency can be more secure and private than traditional payment methods, which can enhance individual autonomy and control over their financial information.
“However, digital currency can also pose risks to individual autonomy and control. For example, some people may feel uncomfortable with the lack of physical presence or central authority associated with digital currencies. Additionally, the high volatility of digital currencies and the potential for fraud or theft can put individuals at risk of losing their investments or savings.
“In summary, the digital currency has the potential to enhance or diminish an individual’s control over their financial life, depending on various factors such as the implementation, regulation, and adoption of digital currencies.”
Take that for what it’s worth, but personally, I find that ominous. Who told or inputted to the machine that there would be a lack of “central authority”? It seems to me there would be more of one.
Doing your best to stop it doesn’t make you a Luddite. It makes you a freedom-loving, autonomous human being.
