Thread by @ZoharAtkins

I’m going to swerve out of my lane and make an observation about crypto culture:

It’s founded on a paradox:

On one hand, the belief in the idea that truth is best discovered through a process that is anonymous, rule-based, unbiased.

On the other hand, a desire for recognition—to status signal oneself as a HODler, a believer, a person with laser eyes.

In the elevation of anonymity and depersonalization we see the ideal of instrumental rationality.

In the swag and identity politics of crypto pride we see the Hegelian return of the agonistic model of politics (a struggle for recognition)

In one model, crypto is a rational hedge against inflation.

In the other, it’s a substantive bet against nationhood in favor of a new form of collective identity, the transnational “imagined community” of crypto utopians/digital nomads.

In one, crypto’s narrative is about democratizing wealth—the liberation of the nobody.

In another, it’s (ironically) personality driven; hyped up or down by influencers.

Being a Bitcoin maximalist (or skeptic) is an identity label despite the claim each side makes to some fundamentals thesis separable from identity.

Without judgment, I’d say crypto bull online culture (as distinct from buying BTC quietly) is a form of identity politics.

To the extent that BTC gains full institutional acceptance and traction, we should expect it to provoke ambivalence amongst its early adapters.

Acceptance means the struggle for recognition has been won; but it also means it’s been lost (absorbed by the assimilating forces of the mainstream).

The underexamined point in all this is that there may be no way around “signaling”—claims to objectivity and rationality will always be as much about identity and group membership as they are about substance

Cc: @robkhenderson @FukuyamaFrancis @EpsilonTheory