We build around Bitcoin to put control of the future back into the hands of the makers and truth seekers, back into the hands of the heroic, creative and noble.

We have three primary objectives:

Secure deep energy resources brought to bear on ultra-efficient Bitcoin mining operations around the globe.

Develop Bitcoin-related software to achieve greater integration of Bitcoin in industry and commerce.

Promote independent settlements which can leapfrog institutions, strengthen the priorities of free societies and continue their dominance of technology development more broadly.

From 1900 to 1990, the United States itself generated more wealth than all the wealth earned in all of human history until then[1]. Yet since then, stagnation has ensued other than around a narrow cone of computer science. The zeal for monumental thinking and boldness in technology and productive industry gave way to timid optionality, rent seeking and consumption. Making up for expanding entitlements and lost growth, the West turned to suffocating waves of credit[2]. What happened?

The means of delivering new credit without advancement in underlying production was simple: the production of more claims to capital than there was capital.

In the years when capital was denominated in gold, a year after year deficit of raw goods with the rest of the world would traditionally accompany a dishoarding of physical gold. Claim checks, however, are denominated in tax-paying assets. This means deficits were accompanied by a liquidation of everything which gave value to the claim checks. Every tax-paying asset, every tax-paying person, every production-generating technology.

This liquidation then began to move from the physical into the abstract. The credibility of democratic and educational intuitions, of public agencies and courts, military capacity once the envy of history, social cohesion and the hard-won peace between ethnic groups, the natural gender strength of children, family intactness, the cognitive integrity and self-intelligibility of individuals, and onward. Any forms of capital imaginable were targeted for liquidation by the issuers of the claim check.

Further supporting the value of the claim check was a toll the issuers charged for any nation which would industrialize. Any purchase of energy worldwide had to be preceded by the purchase of a claim check to used buy the energy. The issuers went to war to enforce this arrangement.

The cost of war and ever-expanding entitlement spending caused many new claims to capital to be issued. This caused rapid increases in the prices of things relative to their historic costs. The unalert believed this meant profits could be captured by sinking precious, limited capital remaining into producing widgets which whose prices rose quickly in response to the growing volume of claim checks.

But once the widgets were churned out, it was discovered no one was there to buy them, that no capital to buy them had ever been present in the first place. The capital spent on the construction of widgets was greater than all the profits which had ever been earned in the 400-year history of banking, of 40% of the wealth of the nation or 13 years of the GDP of all Africa. Lost forever.

The response to this destruction was to create yet again more claim checks equal in volume to what had been lost, as though it had never happened.

Onlookers observed this was not the first time these events had transpired. Nonetheless, the financial system had finally been severed from the tethers of underlying real capital, and therefore untethered to its only reason to exist: to help us act sensibly for the benefit of the future.

In the very moment of danger, the danger itself was signal to turn off their sight. To suspend their judgment. To detach from concerns for the future. To be bribed into complicity with a financial regime entering a final stage of deconstruction. To follow an unbroken path over the cliff on the assumption that danger will always remain unreal owing to the super-sovereign power of central banks, their machinery of claim check creation, and their propagandist cronies singing lullabies that everything will turn out alright.

May they be damned… and all who seek their empty shelter.

Each year there are around $70 trillion in financial transactions, $63 trillion is refinancing old debts coming due, and only $7 trillion in new investment, or around $90 per person globally. This is compared to a global asset base of $350 trillion, making new investment less than 2% of global assets. Returns on each new dollar of investment must be 9-10 times higher than interest owed on new credit issued.

If not, the entrepreneurs are deemed to have failed. This causes the liquidation of entrepreneurial quality and for new companies to move from industrial production to mediocrity or gambling. And how much of that 2% is actually genuine innovation? When factoring a Krugmanesque inflation target of 3%, counterfeiting 1.5 times the total of new investments made, these entrepreneurial producers must outperform by 1,500% or more.

In contrast, for a country with a fixed amount of gold or even claim checks, every year it produces 1% more than it did previously, all things get 1% cheaper. When technology growth is strong, production is even faster and more profitable, and things get ever cheaper in a flywheel of virtuous progress. Entrepreneurs, inventors, creators, etc. are the root of compounding liberation, civilization and human abundance. Sacrificial ceding of entrepreneurial quality over to the public artifact of state-issued currency is an act of human extinction.

Technologies most often dual-use. They can be coopted to further entrench statists as a war profiteers and tax farmers. Atomic weapons, gain of function biology for pandemics and ethnicity-specific virus engineering, internet as a tool of mass surveillance, AI and CBDCs as panopticon prisons, the list goes on. Or they can be directed at human flourishing. Nuclear power, friendly cancer-targeting viruses, etc. the more we cede to the perversion of postmodernist money, the more we incentivize technology for malignant uses.

Technology development maps to the subtleties of a worldview. It is driven subliminally and subconsciously by ideology and a culture’s spiritual model of the world. In a deep sense, the mental model itself is a homo sapien tool. Ideological constructs are acts of toolmaking and worldviews serve to instrumentalize. They are the ontologically prior substrate of technology. Technology leadership cannot be ceded to ideological motivations which are counter to the principles of free and open societies.

We live in an era of the industrialization of thought, where as the consequence of industrial mass production lines, the world is seen as a linear, standardized and systematized thing. The most important technology of all, the one superordinate to all other concerns, is the technology of money. The societies and values system which win in the long run are those who can accumulate capital the fastest and guard it the best. This is impossible without sound money. Over time, technology growth begets itself from the capital accumulation it creates. Technology creativity and sound money are the two fulcrums of a flourishing people. A society without sound money cannot be an innovative one for long.

In order to prevent nations which do not share our values or principles from leading the development of technologies, the installation of sound money is the farthest upstream concern.

Karl Marx described the necessity for communist states to seize control of money and credit as the means of preventing private individuals from innovating and creating their way into conditions of influence that would supersede the communist state. This notion was so directly lifted from feudalism it was difficult to discern Marx and his fellows from other contemporary, also-ran, feudal ideologue reactionaries who sought the overthrow of Enlightenment Liberalism. Capital (and therefore sound money) was seen as a tool of the creator who rejected that the rule of stupefied violence was the rule of Man.

Advocating for the state’s control of money and credit is reactionary. It is the single most important plank in a worldview that actively denies the universal moral sovereignty of individuals. The model of Man the creator, innovator, beauty maker/artist, entrepreneur at the center of the ideology of the West is the mortal enemy of the ideologues of statism.

Mortal enemy though it is, is not economically self-supporting and nonetheless has a kind of malarial codependence on the heroic creativity of the West. As such, postmodernist and neo-Marxist ideologies have infiltrated such large swaths of intellectual and cultural life in the West that they have seeped into views on monetary system and money generally. This worldview’s central unifying precept is the self-arrogated role of consuming stores of capital today at the expense of others.

The postmodern ideology in money contrives all sorts of “economics-sounding” tropes and bromides to justify continued capital liquidation. As financial capital depletes, other stores of capital are targeted for liquidation: cultural institutions, biological gender strength, families, communities, education, legal systems, etc. All stores of any spiritual, psychology, mental, sociological, religious, mechanical, industrial, technological, medical, educational, and financial, are targeted by monetary postmodernists for liquidation. As Thatcher said, “sooner or later you run out of others’ money.” Cultural weakening combined with falling savings and breakdowns in monetary integrity very quickly lead to supply chain break downs and war.

The question of sound money is the single most important question for peace, as well as technology growth. Sound money is a defense technology.

The pathology of monetary postmodernism has been so protracted and pernicious, its visible destructiveness so well-documented, we surmise that the pathology is a war implement. Outwardly, war exists principally for the control of currency rackets. Governments exist primarily to make these wars. St. Augustine described that “…(T)he real evils in war are love of violence, revengeful cruelty, fierce and implacable enmity, wild resistance, and the lust of power and such like.” These traits are the worldview bedrock of monetary postmodernists. An ongoing enslavement of all Mankind is the goal.

This is held in blinding contrast to the ideology and worldview of the West: Man is Sovereign, Man is Heroic, Man is Triumphant, Man is Noble, at the center of Man’s work are emanations of Beauty.

Sound money serves as the deterrence a society needs to defend its principles and sources of capital value, from the financial to the spiritual.

Cultures which embrace sound money likewise progress in a geometric rate compared to slavery-based cultures in terms of technology, engineering, as well in the arts and overall measures of happiness. The power to make laws and make war are fundamentally about the power to preserve property. Ceding control of money to postmodernist insiders cedes both law-making and war-making to a group pathologically opposed to the sanctity of property and to Man’s nobility. There could not be a more cosmic difference.

The tendency of transnational insiders to seek ever-densified centralization is a bit of an irony. On one hand, they must enmesh with producers. Yet then they jet away in a dramatic and inevitable discard.

This worldview continuously requires the presence the abused serf as supply source and as a persecutory object. Aloof disconnection with the means of production does require central collection hubs. Aloofness requires grandstanding while persecuting. No serfs, no more ideology.

Centralizers in a basic sense are arrested infants, always seeking a mother from whom they can suck up attention and be the center of the world. The a-priori mental model of this worldview is a worldview of centralization, pathologically holding the infant at the center of all. Centralization of other aspects of human life is the predictable outgrowth.

Today, the desire to digitize everything overflowing from the trenches of the currency war derives from the desire to centralize it. Centralized health records, passports, personal bank account regulation and CBDCs, personal carbon taxes, meat consumed, distances one may drive, access to aviation, access to public communication fora, represents a threat to civil society the likes of which Antonio Gramsci could never have dreamt:

The digitization of each aspect of human life is an agenda to transform the consciousness of society as an act of worldview warfare.

Heavily venture-backed Worldcoin has set about forming a global database of human IDs issued from a retina scan, with the capacity to deploy radar to monitor individual vital signs, connected to all financial transaction data for each individual, managed by a centralized operation for cross-referencing sensitive KYC/AML data. The Bank of International Settlements openly declares that its digital currency tokens will be explicitly used to approve or deny any specific transaction or revoke any personal account balance it chooses.

These systems are developing for the purpose of “debanking” individuals for political purposes as in China. The BIS also seeks to unify not just currency accounts but all individual ownership of public and private securities. Conveniently, this would require harmonization of securities laws and tax regimes across all global jurisdictions. Such a system would allow an unelected Ministry of Panoptic Finance in a foreign country to liquidate any personal capital or financial asset at will as well as yoke every other form of stored merit a human possesses, all unified with inescapable biometrics in databases inaccessible to individual owners/users.

The tokenization of every asset in existence on a permissioned blockchain run by global central banks is a palace coup to supersede all national and local government, property law, and even the idea of self-government itself. The ability to turn off one’s ownership of anything on a momentary, including their identity, is a revolution in socialism. Controlling how much citizens spend is threatening enough, but controlling and prohibiting how much a citizen is permitted to save by deleting or expiring savings accounts entombs him in a state of perpetual volatility, reactivity, servile, betrayed, extorted, discarded persecutory object.

Money is the counterpart in every transaction. Which one of us would allow Alan Greenspan or Janet Yellen in between us and our spouse as we lay down at night? Allowing them into the intimacy of our private transactions is equally absurd. Especially if they demanded payment in the morning!

“When the state dominates, killing becomes abstract. Servitude began with the shepherds; in the river valleys it attained perfection with canals and dikes. Its model was the slavery in mines and mills. Since then, the ruses for concealing chains have been refined.” Ernst Junger, Eumeswil

There is something of beating a dead horse in beating back this perennial socialism. But what is noble, what is worthy, requires making the distinctions. What is noble is at the heart of sound money. The control of the future is squarely in the hands of that progressive, endeavoring framework of the mind that takes joy in creation. If we can marshal the tools this requires.

Casting counterfeit as not counterfeit if it is perpetrated by the state is the primary scaffolding of postmodern ideology. All other ideological parasitism is subordinate to and flows from this.

When evil wants to operate at scale, it needs to prevent people from understanding evil. It wants to keep itself from being investigated. It’s not enough to capture, universities and schools in order to teach incorrectly about the counterfeiting racket, the cognitive substrate of society must also be liquidated. Evil institutional players, which must need to shield themselves from investigation repeatedly, must also invest in generating worldviews which silence the observation that evil requires collusion.

The Western entrepreneurial tradition is strong and combative. We once lead the world in heterodox thinking. We are a free society, and we sometimes act like one. We are a rich society, but we don’t invest like one anymore. The national culture of entrepreneurship is deeply threatened by the way in which counterfeiting rackets create profound diseconomics and bribe Western business into uncreative joinerism and collusion in the racket.

The fountainhead of all this prosperity, the ideology around Western entrepreneurship, is the most profound cognitive substrate of a free society. It is the basic mineral of the means of production. Centralization in money is an attack on this cognitive substrate.

Fundamentally, a currency which is backed by a promise to repay more of the same currency has no backing at all. If there is no backing, there is no true store of capital in the system. As this willingness recedes of people to tolerate the violence a collateral-free system requires, it collapses.

But the entire purpose of capital is not for consumption. It is to sponsor risk taking. Its purpose is to construct more and more complex, roundabout production. It exists to facilitate risk taking to accomplish this. This is the defining feature of modern life. Risk-taking. Entrepreneurship.

Collusion with an ideology which supports the removal of capital from the ecosystem and thereby prevents entrepreneurship and risk taking is evil.

This ideology endeavors to remove control of the future from dynamic creators and reduces the quotient of dynamic creativity at large, in favor of fashioning more abused serfs. The less creative dynamism, the less surplus, the more those serfs closest to the spigot of inflation use this as leverage to cannibalize those around them. Dangerous conformity emerges, where all people collusively place themselves at the mercy of the powers that surround them, and away from the heterodoxy that drives creative, productive enterprise.

On the scale of history, the ethical principle of heroism as eminent from an inner imperative, embedded in instinct and intelligence, has been the guiding conscience of the West. The core archetypal power which generates techno scientific progress emanates from an ancient place. It is not mere traditionalism repeated sentimentally, nor is it modernism, which is often a regurgitation of futures past, but a more primordial force. The upheavals of technological science, which have again and again gripped the West are in essence always also a return to an archaic mentality. This archaic mentality is archaic in that it is rooted in the basic mineral of physical and metaphysical order: Beauty. And it is this substructure of the magnificent functionality of the cosmos emanating upward into the creative will of a human being that gives him the courage and constitution to bear heterodox ideas for the sake of uncovering deeper truths. This creative will that emanates from the ancient is in its nature paradoxically always looking into the future. It is the ancient and the progressive embodied at once. Alongside this, there is a sense that sound money is necessary for the extremes of low time preference in both the archaic and the futuristic.

With the receding of the American Order into fragmented blocs, often still comprised of ethnostates, the paradigm of modernity itself is no longer viable. This bifurcation, in particular through the addition of advanced genetics, AI, and privately-issued money, suggests that those societies which can most cleanly resurrect this archaic mentality, will be the breakaway societies. Their capital deepening and technology advancement will compound far faster. There will be a tragic awakening to the incredible costs of censorship in money and in heterodox ideas states have inflicted on societies.

The potential for divergence of humanity into parallel worlds is again upon us. But this time in a magnitude, not even dreamt by the standards of the Cold War. One into a kind of rebranded, middle ages, and one of extreme progress in techno-industry. This bifurcation exposes the deepest risk we face: a neo-feudal techno-totalitarianism which demands a dystopian conformity from the managed, and reserves a techno-autarchy for themselves.

The future will not be drafted by governments, but by the nimble, interconnected and technologically enabled. The two most profound technologies are the archaic, Promethean mindsets/Worldview, and sound money. All other technologies are derivatives of these two. It is, therefore these two technologies which the Bolshevik movement will continue to censor, co-opt and derange.

And so the greatest power source we can imagine are semi-autarkic blocs or communities with differing industrial footprints, which are nonetheless interlinked through decentralized and sound money-based networks with ultra technological enclaves, such that the frontiers between them and the ways of life and production of traditional societies can greatly recede.

Sovereign communities must deploy and embrace technologies more adeptly to dissolve the anti-spiritual, anti-heroic ideology of censorship and counterfeit.

If not, the entrepreneurs are deemed to have failed. This causes the liquidation of entrepreneurial quality and for new companies to move from industrial production to mediocrity or gambling. And how much of that 2% is actually genuine innovation? When factoring a Krugmanesque inflation target of 3%, counterfeiting 1.5 times the total of new investments made, these entrepreneurial producers must outperform by 1,500% or more.

In contrast, for a country with a fixed amount of gold or even claim checks, every year it produces 1% more than it did previously, all things get 1% cheaper. When technology growth is strong, production is even faster and more profitable, and things get ever cheaper in a flywheel of virtuous progress. Entrepreneurs, inventors, creators, etc. are the root of compounding liberation, civilization and human abundance. Sacrificial ceding of entrepreneurial quality over to the public artifact of state-issued currency is an act of human extinction.

Technologies most often dual-use. They can be coopted to further entrench statists as a war profiteers and tax farmers. Atomic weapons, gain of function biology for pandemics and ethnicity-specific virus engineering, internet as a tool of mass surveillance, AI and CBDCs as panopticon prisons, the list goes on. Or they can be directed at human flourishing. Nuclear power, friendly cancer-targeting viruses, etc. the more we cede to the perversion of postmodernist money, the more we incentivize technology for malignant uses.

Technology development maps to the subtleties of a worldview. It is driven subliminally and subconsciously by ideology and a culture’s spiritual model of the world. In a deep sense, the mental model itself is a homosapien tool. Ideological constructs are acts of toolmaking and worldviews serve to instrumentalize. They are the ontologically prior substrate of technology. Technology leadership cannot be ceded to ideological motivations which are counter to the principles of free and open societies.

The most important technology of all, the one superordinate to all other concerns, is the technology of money. The societies and values system which win in the long run are those who can accumulate capital the fastest and guard it the best. This is impossible without sound money. Over time, technology growth begets itself from the capital accumulation it creates. Technology creativity and sound money are the two fulcrums of a flourishing people. A society without sound money cannot be an innovative one for long.

In order to prevent nations which do not share our values or principles from leading the development of technologies, the installation of sound money is the farthest upstream concern.

Karl Marx described the necessity for communist states to seize control of money and credit as the means of preventing private individuals from innovating and creating their way into conditions of influence that would supersede the communist state. This notion was so directly lifted from feudalism it was difficult to discern Marx and his fellows from other contemporary, also-ran, feudal ideologue reactionaries who sought the overthrow of Enlightenment Liberalism. Capital (and therefore sound money) was seen as a tool of the creator who rejected that the rule of stupefied violence was the rule of Man.

Advocating for the state’s control of money and credit is reactionary. It is the single most important plank in a worldview that actively denies the universal moral sovereignty of individuals. The model of Man the creator, innovator, beauty maker/artist, entrepreneur at the center of the ideology of the West is the mortal enemy of the ideologues of statism.

Mortal enemy though it is, is not economically self-supporting and nonetheless has a kind of malarial codependence on the heroic creativity of the West. As such, postmodernist and neo-Marxist ideologies have infiltrated such large swaths of intellectual and cultural life in the West that they have seeped into views on monetary system and money generally. This worldview’s central unifying precept is the self-arrogated role of consuming stores of capital today at the expense of others.

The postmodern ideology in money contrives all sorts of “economics-sounding” tropes and bromides to justify continued capital liquidation. As financial capital depletes, other stores of capital are targeted for liquidation: cultural institutions, biological gender strength, families, communities, education, legal systems, etc. All stores of any spiritual, psychology, mental, sociological, religious, mechanical, industrial, technological, medical, educational, and financial, are targeted by monetary postmodernists for liquidation. As Thatcher said, “sooner or later you run out of others’ money.” Cultural weakening combined with falling savings and breakdowns in monetary integrity very quickly lead to supply chain break downs and war.

The question of sound money is the single most important question for peace, as well as technology growth. Sound money is a defense technology.

The pathology of monetary postmodernism has been so protracted and pernicious, its visible destructiveness so well-documented, we surmise that the pathology is a war implement. Outwardly, war exists principally for the control of currency rackets. Governments exist primarily to make these wars. St. Augustine described that “…(T)he real evils in war are love of violence, revengeful cruelty, fierce and implacable enmity, wild resistance, and the lust of power and such like.” These traits are the worldview bedrock of monetary postmodernists. An ongoing enslavement of all Mankind is the goal.

This is held in blinding contrast to the ideology and worldview of the West: Man is Sovereign, Man is Heroic, Man is Triumphant, Man is Noble, at the center of Man’s work are emanations of Beauty.

Sound money serves as the deterrence a society needs to defend its principles and sources of capital value, from the financial to the spiritual.

Cultures which embrace sound money likewise progress in a geometric rate compared to slavery-based cultures in terms of technology, engineering, as well in the arts and overall measures of happiness. The power to make laws and make war are fundamentally about the power to preserve property. Ceding control of money to postmodernist insiders cedes both law-making and war-making to a group pathologically opposed to the sanctity of property and to Man’s nobility. There could not be a more cosmic difference.

The tendency of transnational insiders to seek ever-densified centralization is a bit of an irony. On one hand, they must enmesh with producers. Yet then they jet away in a dramatic and inevitable discard.

This worldview continuously requires the presence the abused serf as supply source and as a persecutory object. Aloof disconnection with the means of production does require central collection hubs. Aloofness requires grandstanding while persecuting. No serfs, no more ideology.

Centralizers in a basic sense are arrested infants, always seeking a mother from whom they can suck up attention and be the center of the world. The a-priori mental model of this worldview is a worldview of centralization, pathologically holding the infant at the center of all. Centralization of other aspects of human life is the predictable outgrowth.

Today, the desire to digitize everything overflowing from the trenches of the currency war derives from the desire to centralize it. Centralized health records, passports, personal bank account regulation and CBDCs, personal carbon taxes, meat consumed, distances one may drive, access to aviation, access to public communication fora, represents a threat to civil society the likes of which Antonio Gramsci could never have dreamt:

The digitization of each aspect of human life is an agenda to transform the consciousness of society as an act of worldview warfare.

Heavily venture-backed Worldcoin has set about forming a global database of human IDs issued from a retina scan, with the capacity to deploy radar to monitor individual vital signs, connected to all financial transaction data for each individual, managed by a centralized operation for cross-referencing sensitive KYC/AML data. The Bank of International Settlements openly declares that its digital currency tokens will be explicitly used to approve or deny any specific transaction or revoke any personal account balance it chooses.

These systems are developing for the purpose of “debanking” individuals for political purposes as in China. The BIS also seeks to unify not just currency accounts but all individual ownership of public and private securities. Conveniently, this would require harmonization of securities laws and tax regimes across all global jurisdictions. Such a system would allow an unelected Ministry of Panoptic Finance in a foreign country to liquidate any personal capital or financial asset at will as well as yoke every other form of stored merit a human possesses, all unified with inescapable biometrics in databases inaccessible to individual owners/users.

The tokenization of every asset in existence on a permissioned blockchain run by global central banks is a palace coup to supersede all national and local government, property law, and even the idea of self-government itself. The ability to turn off one’s ownership of anything on a momentary, including their identity, is a revolution in socialism. Controlling how much citizens spend is threatening enough, but controlling and prohibiting how much a citizen is permitted to save by deleting or expiring savings accounts entombs him in a state of perpetual volatility, reactivity, servile, betrayed, extorted, discarded persecutory object.

Money is the counterpart in every transaction. Which one of us would allow Alan Greenspan or Janet Yellen in between us and our spouse as we lay down at night? Allowing them into the intimacy of our private transactions is equally absurd. Especially if they demanded payment in the morning!

“When the state dominates, killing becomes abstract. Servitude began with the shepherds; in the river valleys it attained perfection with canals and dikes. Its model was the slavery in mines and mills. Since then, the ruses for concealing chains have been refined.” Ernst Junger, Eumeswil

There is something of beating a dead horse in beating back this perennial socialism. But what is noble, what is worthy, requires making the distinctions. What is noble is at the heart of sound money. The control of the future is squarely in the hands of that progressive, endeavoring framework of the mind that takes joy in creation. If we can marshal the tools this requires.