2016 Could Be Bitcoin’s Year If We Help It

2016 Could Be Bitcoin’s Year If We Help It

The announcement made by Mike Hearn on January 14th, 2016 has shaken the community by calling Bitcoin a failure. The price has slid downwards about 17% over the course of 24 hours and seems to have stabilized. Hearn had brought up many interesting points to the conversation, but most of them were believed to be obfuscated and logically unsound arguments. However, because of these statements the faith in Satoshis invention seems to have faltered.

Also read: Will 2016 be the Year of the Satoshi? Bitcoin.com Team Shares Its Predictions

There is one important aspect of basic reasoning and logic that one must consider before thinking about what has happened. Has the oldest trick in the book messed with your psyche? Hegelian Dialectic is something that seems to be very profound concerning this subject, and the use of this tactic is as clear as day. 2015 was the year of the Bankchain, and sure there have been many arguments against these private blockchains. However, there have been many who have let these projects take hold of the community spirit. That somehow privatized blockchains were Bitcoin’s friend even though the designers were pillaging the technology.

Think about it. We’ve let it cumulate all year long that blockchain technology was the hottest tech worldwide, and it is going to change everything. We’ve let the permissioned bankchains sit right beside Bitcoin’s ideology, and the promises they gave were allowed to shine. They were not treated like the altcoins in 2014 that are ironically decentralized blockchains and are publicly transparent. No, the distributed ledgers that have been allowed to prosper were the ones produced by the very legacy banks who have brought havoc to our economy.

The attitude is similar and just as illogical as the Minarchist, who believes that government needs to tend to just a few of society’s affairs. Just as it always does, the authority’s position grows larger and more parasitic over time because it was allowed to thrive. After 2008, the digital currency Bitcoin was born with the intentions to change the current way we operate and understand money. As time progressed the virtual medium of exchange became more popular as the years past and it accumulated value. Then the banks step in right next to the currency’s spotlight, and they take the stage with something “different.” The permissioned blockchain. Are we going to let the very institutions who corrupted our economy co-op our technology?

“The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks”

– Genesis Block

When the bankchains were announced, they were celebrated just as much as a typical positive Bitcoin announcement. Instead of concentrating on the issues we needed to fix concerning the cryptocurrency’s protocol, we let a whole year go by bolstering traditional financiers permissioned concepts. On top of that, we let infighting plague the debate and the discussion on how to deal with the code was suppressed. Think about it. When an alternative fork topic was banned from the most popular Bitcoin forum, and many BIP proposals pushed to the side, we let ourselves hinder our growth. Yet we allowed hundreds of topics of private chains owned by corporate interests rise to the top of forum conversation.

There’s no need to get into the benefits of the permissionless distributed vs. the permissioned version. Every Bitcoin supporter should know the fundamental differences between the two. Many people have produced a fair amount of opinion to why private blockchain-based are basically MySQL databases behind closed doors. We as a community understand why the Bitcoin blockchain is so special but let our enemies subvert our growth. The time to shake the parasites is now.

A project that’s backed by 42 banks and has a press conference on why Bitcoin is a failure is the enemy laughing at our faces. This announcement conveniently displayed before Hearn’s illogical statements. This is what you receive after letting leeches move into the territory of superior technology. Bitcoin has not failed but has to change gradually and be fueled by innovation to grow. Cushioning the concepts of JP Morgan, Citi, Chase, Barclays and the rest of the gang does not improve our model.

It’s up to us as a community to make sure we transform our technology to work well with society. If we are too busy championing the ideas of banksters then we will let Bitcoin slide once again. This means that focus needs to be on the code changes and consensus not what the legacy banks are doing.

Why do we care? They are our direct competition. Teaching people the basics again instead of flightless 2.0 projects that the majority of people are not yet ready for. Letting a whole year go by battling over what we should do and at the same time celebrate alternative chains doesn’t seem to be working out. Because we let this giant bankchain backed by over 40 banks be called the “dream team” of the blockchain we should expect to be kicked when we try to climb the hill.

This attitude has to change for us to win. We have to embrace Bitcoin as number one and the best blockchain around. Efforts must be directed to the network itself, and the community needs to fix its issues. 2016 must be the year of Bitcoin and very much unlike the year before if we are to succeed.

Do you think Bitcoin is a failure or its competitors? Let us know in the comments below. 

Images courtesy of Crypto-graphics.com, Pixbay, Twitter and Shutterstock