Over the last couple of months, many factions of the alternative media have been reporting on and providing the people with contradictory advice— and no one seems to be talking about it. One day we will be warned of the evermore brazen war on cash, and told that we cannot allow them to win. The following day, however, we will be told of how bitcoin is the answer to our prayers, and how our investments in it will bring down our banking overlords.

Clearly, to anyone who takes a moment to think about it, this makes entirely no sense. If our enslavers seek the abolition of cash in order to advance their agendas, then surely a mass exodus from paper money towards digital currencies is a step in that very direction.

Admittedly, I too had overlooked this inconsistency for far too long. I have been aware of the potential dangers of blockchain technology for quite some time, as any followers of my ongoing fiction series, "Blockchained" will know. However, up until a recent discussion I had with my brother, @tonyr, I had allowed my optimism to convince me that the conception of bitcoin was altruistic in design. Thanks to our discussion, I was forced to rethink things.

Was my admiration and sense of kinship towards Satoshi Nakamoto misplaced? Was he, she or it what I had imagined? Or perhaps the very opposite?

Now, we all know that there is no shortage of passionate advocates for bitcoin, so I expect that some of you may not like to hear what I have to say. To those of you, I would advise that you look at this post as nothing more than a thought experiment. I am making no accusations against bitcoin, nor its creator(s). I do not know the answers, but the purpose of this post is not to give you any. Rather, I hope to provide you with questions that you may not have previously considered, and if I'm lucky, perhaps one day you will bring the answers to me.

Could Bitcoin Be A Government Creation?

It seems that many governments around the world are fighting against the rise of bitcoin. In a better world, this alone would be evidence of bitcoin's purity. But, as too many of us know(or not enough of us?), this is not a better world. In the words of Shakespeare, "The world's a stage," and we cannot be sure that what we see in the political arena is not simply theatre.

This world, is a world of lies. One deception after another paved the way towards modern society, and now the truth has become somewhat of a mythical creature. Mathematician I am not, but to me, it seems as though the odds of turning on your TV to see a world leader speaking sincerely, are akin to the odds of encountering a unicorn at your local coffee shop.

It was only a few months ago that much of the public were convinced that the establishment was against Trump taking office. One could even argue that it was this very sentiment that resulted in his election. But, what happened once he was sworn into office? The exact same thing that occurred eight years prior, when Obama betrayed those who voted for him by delivering more of the same. Given the actions Trump has taken recently, one can only presume that the media's attack on Trump prior to the election was nothing more than a calculated deception intended to convert government dissenters into law-abiding citizens.

If this is the case — if the deceptive nature of modern society has progressed to the point where our politicians and news anchors are quite literally acting out scenes in order to shape public opinion — then how can one place any level of confidence in the veracity of the attacks against bitcoin? I can't speak for everyone, but for me, there's plenty reason to be skeptical.

It does not help that the creator(s) of bitcoin opted to remain anonymous. Had we the chance to know the truth of who developed it, then we would also have the opportunity to assess their integrity. But the irony that lies within Nakamoto's anonymity is far too great to ignore.

If you are to be the creator of one of the most innovative pieces of technology to date— a technology that fundamentally promotes transparency, then why would you not extend that transparency to your own identity or identities?

Perhaps they were simply afraid they would be killed? Perhaps their intent was pure, but their name was tainted, and so anonymity was the best option? We don't know. Which is why we also cannot say with any level of certainty that it was not the government themselves, a shady corporation with illicit agendas, or a top secret artificial intelligence that created it.

The timing of bitcoin was certainly convenient. We are on the brink of a global economic collapse. It only takes a rudimentary understanding of fractual reserve banking to know that it was never intended to be sustainable. The collapse is and always has been inevitable, and it would be foolish to think that those who imposed the current banking system upon us have not spent a great deal of time developing a plan for when it does. This makes the timing of bitcoin's emergence a tad suspicious. In a time of great economic turmoil, when many experts are proclaiming that the collapse is just around the corner, an alternative monetary system arises, just in time to garner enough support and trust from the public to be a viable replacement for the old one.

That currency just happening to be digital, and tied to a distributed, immutable ledger, seems to be a bit coincidental too. The government have long sought to implant every civilian with an RFID chip, and with the integration of bitcoin or another blockchain-backed digital currency, that chip would give the government supreme control over the people and their finances.

Why Would They Do This?

To understand this, we have to attempt to see things from the perspective of those who are pushing for this New World Order that we hear so much about. For such a person, it is far easier to get the people to do what you want, if they believe that they are doing what they want-- and exactly what you hope they will not.

So, would it be wise to incite mass panic and potential world-wide riots by informing the public that the banks have served their purpose, and are about to collapse? Would the people be willing to volunteer their participation in the new system you have to offer, when you just admitted that you got the last one wrong?

No. Of course they wouldn't. They would revolt, and ensure that the next system they find themselves in, is one of their own creation. This is why it would be smarter to convince the people that the new system being introduced, is one created by them, or by an anonymous revolutionary who saved the people from their oppressors.

With all the time they have had to think about this, and with all the resources and think tanks at their disposal, such a plan does not seem too far-fetched to me. They could have released bitcoin(and it's open-source technology) to the public, with the hopes that cryptocurrencies would grow organically, and become more and more popular among the people.

Next, they need only put on a massive show, convincing the masses that they are against this technology and they're scared about what it could mean for the banks. Now the growing millions of government dissenters around the world have reason to go look into cryptocurrency. When they like what they see, and start putting money into digital currencies, the value skyrockets and the cryptoscene attracts the attention of the average person who is simply looking to make a profit.

Before you know it, digital currency is a massive thing. A better thing even, than the cash we claim we do not want to let go of. Eventually, it gets to a point where more than half of the world's population are holding their assets in cryptocurrencies rather than traditional banks, as they have grown tired of seeing their money decrease in value rather than increase.

The banks begin to fail, and the people cheer. The cheering won't last long though, because all it will take is a "terrorist's" EMP, a "space weather event," a "Russian hack," or any other false flag event, and all of a sudden, everyone's money is gone. Things would get bad... Very bad. But, the people would not be able to blame the government, because the government warned us all not to abandon the banks. Now we can only blame ourselves for the dystopian chaos our actions have ultimately created.

People will kill one another for food. Government departments will fail, and criminals will wreak havoc on the streets. Mothers will weep for their lost sons, and daughters will weep for their murdered fathers. Things will get so bad, that when the government finally emerges with a solution, the people will jump at it. Thus, the birth of the New World Order-- out of chaos.

If I were a psychopathic, megalomaniacal trillionaire-- this is how I would go about achieving my agenda. What about you? What would you do?

Just to clarify...

I want to reiterate that this is simply a thought experiment. I don't know if such a thing is going to happen, nor do I even suspect it. Chances are, Satoshi Nakamoto's intentions were pure. I know that I would prefer to think that, at least.

But, if we don't want a cashless society, then we had better consider the size of the role that bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies ought to be playing in society. And we had better do it soon, because while Bitcoin may very well be innocent in nature, the technology it shared with the world can most certainly be used against us, and I will not be surprised if there is already some nefarious iteration of blockchain technology in the works, behind a thick door, deep underground.

---

---

Thanks for reading. Let me know if you think this is just the ramblings of someone who smoked a joint too many, or if you too think we should entertain a little skepticism in regards to bitcoin and its creator(s).