What place does David Icke have in a blog about cryptocurrency? He serves an important purpose for me — to detail a perhaps new perspective on what the future will look like and how we can best manage our present thoughts of it.
Let's frame the discussion first. Am I an Icke supporter or detractor? Neither.
I believe Icke's public perspective is economically incentivized. When he says that the world is run by reptiles from another planet, I can't verify that. I can definitely say that the world is run by groups of people motivated by their reptilian brains far more than average men are.
Forgive me if I've missed an interview, but I've never heard David Icke talk about crypto or its potential for decentralization. My guess is that he believes that bitcoin is a government invention deriving from DARPA's invention of the Internet. Crypto's purpose is to slowly onboard humans into accepting a cashless society/centralized financial structure and the surveillance that comes with it.
I have no way of determining the intent behind crypto. We don't even know the identity of Satoshi Nakamoto definitively. What I do know is that I, and every other human on this planet, is still in control of what they do with this growing technology.
Personally, I hodl bitcoin as an expression of my sovereignty. Most others, I assume (including useless shills like Elliotrades) are in this thing for the profits. Whatever. I'm not here to argue that now (I will be in 99% of my other posts).
The thing is that David Icke talks about free speech and sovereignty as if those things are something most people prioritize. They don't. The theft of these things from the average individual, which like Icke I do believe is actively being pursued, is less important to the victims of that theft than comfort and convenience.
As Icke himself described the world, people always naturally tended towards centralization. Before the point at which any centralized authority had the means to impose itself, groups of people came together in a pyramidal fashion. Why then, am I supposed to be scared that so-called "elites" are trying to take something from humanity that it does not and never really has valued?
Let's be clear. I value it. But I'm not most people. If someone tries to custody my bitcoin, or by extension, my sovereignty, they're going to have a huge fight on their hands. But I myself have given up the "fight" of convincing the majority of humans they should prioritize personal sovereignty. Most people aren't ready for it. Hell, I'm not ready for a life completely off the grid. I use society as I see fit to provide me conveniences so that I can focus on a higher purpose.
So that's why the whole Icke scare tactic doesn't work on me any more. As a social skeptic and mirror to humanity's underbelly, Icke serves his purpose. But there is no reason to be afraid of a future where computers and humans physically merge. The fruits of that marriage have much more to do with the attitude of humanity than it does with the technology or even the centralization of the technology.
So let's talk about the future. Yes, we are at a crossroads. I can see blockchain technology providing a digital safe space for those of a more libertarian mindset. I don't hold out hope that bitcoin or even Monero or ZCash will somehow convince humanity that privacy is important. Most holders will eventually trade their privacy coins and BTC for CBDCs and be quite happy with the transaction. However, I do see the potential for a separate society undergirded by separate blockchains that could create their own sustainable grid or digital country, if you will.
There is no reason that blockchain tech can't be expanded into its own Internet of Things, for example, creating a web of connected devices that work outside of the digital grid that oppressive countries are trying to build. People can create their own value, decentralize the nodes and convert that value into electrical power to run physical objects. As this technology improves, we will see the rise of different communities — the majority who want international centralization, and those who would rather centralize in their own, much smaller decentralized tribes.
The defensive characteristics of blockchain, properly managed, could ward off the inevitable attacks that these libertarian IoT communities would face from the old world. That's a great thing, because free-thinking people are always hopelessly outgunned. The point is that this type of society is possible. It will be smaller, but it can exist. I wish that tastemakers like David Icke would focus their prodigious storytelling skill set on promoting the solutions rather than the problem. But hey, I can't match those paychecks he's getting now.