I am in the process of writing an article about why many left-centralists have a hard time with cryptocurrencies. I use that term because cryptocurrencies have been partly created by left-wing anarchists who can also be described as left-wing decentralists who want more decentralization of functions and things.
Decentralization means, among other things, that people cooperate and implement things without "middlemen," such as governments and banks. In the case of cryptocurrencies, the case is that such currencies have no government or state behind them. Some cryptocurrencies are governed by decision-making processes in communities.
An example of a left-centralists who dislikes cryptocurrencies is the economist and Greece's former finance minister Yanis Varoufakis, who believes, among other things, that central banks should not be abolished but "democratized" and that it is wrong to "depoliticize money". Varoufakis believes that technocratic institutions as central banks can be democratized by the citizens of a certain nation deciding through discussions and elections what the central bank's printed money is to be used for.
Opinions and arguments that X should not be depoliticized and that X should be democratized are common in the history of socialism. In addition, many left-wingers communicate about "democratic socialism", because, throughout history, socialism in name and practice has often been used through violence, oppression, and dictatorship.
I see several problems in the way left-centralists think. That X is depoliticized through a representatively elected parliament not being allowed to decide on X does not mean X is exempt from interpersonal and political conversations. Political decisions can be made without political parties and in the private sphere and society. A practical example is cryptocurrencies, where people can, in an open, safe, and democratic way and without formal politicians, carry out decisions and conversations that, in practice, mean things like economic democracy, welfare, or climate change.
Another problem I see is opinions about democracy and institutions. Because if "everyone" in, for example, Sweden were "democratic socialists," then everyone would be expected to act uniformly and in the same ways. Democracy is, among other things, about pluralism, and decentralization is, among other things, about alternative options where people create systems and communities that are needed for different functions and levels. In a system where only one ideology formally prevails, political processes will, in practice, be depoliticized because no politics through deeper conversation and opinion pluralism will be allowed.
Thus, the desire to democratize various institutions can only be done from below and through inclusive processes based on voluntariness and respect for precisely democratic values. On the other hand, the desire to control things through arbitrary demands for control and uniformity combined with references to democracy is, in practice, about undemocratic processes and end goals.
Thanks for reading. You can reward and support my writing via:
– vladlausevic
Skycoin – ZxjhWMJRbTNCRQzy5MekZzH4fhdWFCqBP8
Bitcoin 3HbxyDXE9MhNQ8RqsirqgYvFupQzh5Xby2
– 0762345677
Tezos?—?tz1QrRzkTAKuPKF8dmGW6c1ScEHBUGvoiJBM
– addr1q9vfs6nqz4xmtnpljwhv4tukyskd2g7enxd87rpugkwwvfun5pnla5d5tes2mvurrc77e7837yd0scrfk063qlha8wgs8d4ynz
