Not sure I understand how the military is going to stop individuals from exchanging goods within a country, are you suggesting the US/Chinese/Some other military would stop the flow of everyday goods into its own country to prevent Bitcoin transactions?

> Not sure I understand how the military is going to stop individuals from exchanging goods within a country

States stop the exchange of goods within, into, or out of their jurisdiction of types or in manners not sanctioned by the state all the time, it's called “law enforcement”, and either the military or paramilitary police forces or both are often involved in it. It's never airtight, but it doesn't have to be to have a big effect.

If the volume of crypto currency transactions ended up becoming a threat to the functioning of the state (through loss of the power of taxation), then yes.

But anyways, isn't that pretty much the anarcho-capitalist vs statist conflict that cryptocurrencies are ultimately trying to aim us towards?

Yes meaning the military would starve a country to root out crypto users? In that scenario, you're unable to use crypto because no goods exist to buy (meaning dollars are useless as well)?

Sorry if I'm completely misunderstanding your argument, but having trouble reading it in a different way.

> In that scenario, you're unable to use crypto because no goods exist to buy (meaning dollars are useless as well)?

The state will take over the entire supply chain to ensure that it transacts in a currency that it controls, crypto or otherwise.

Without that, the shared physical and legal infrastructure that supply chain depends on would cease to exist, and with it the supply chain.

Individuals, or the small communes that act financially as individuals in the crypto based trading system would have to trade in the simplest raw materials and finished products would be all have to be made hyper locally. Otherwise what entity would secure the transit of high value finished goods from supplier to customer?

I understand that it's a vision of the future that many people relish for its "freedom" from the state (but not so much from the local tribe). But universal crypto based transactions are not a drop in replacement for what we have now that keeps everything else the same. They come with their own radically different future-primitive vision for the world.

Taking over the entire supply chain is completely impossible though, black markets will always exist, and not just for simple raw materials.

Another aspect of crypto is the ability to simply leave the oppressor's territory, taking your money with you.

I'm absolutely not saying this is a perfect solution, or that government is powerless in this situation, but it seems hand wavey to say they'll just seize control of every economic transaction. That's a VERY difficult thing to do.

> Taking over the entire supply chain is completely impossible though

And it's unnecessary. Black markets exist today and always will. The state would need to merely take over the major suppliers of raw inputs to all products, and major finished products, and that will be enough to keep crypto only relevant on the margins. If black markets become a problem due to crime (i.e. the mafia) they can be dealt with using law enforcement action.

> Another aspect of crypto is the ability to simply leave the oppressor's territory, taking your money with you.

I agree, and you will also leave behind many of the benefits that come from societies that have centralized organization, like i.e. roads and a justice system. No territory with a state that provides infrastructure is going to allow you to operate there indefinitely without paying for the privilege of using that infrastructure.

You will have to find a place with effectively no state, and provide the basics for yourself. But it would be hard, and it's not something that can scale to our current society's scale or prosperity, though.

> The state would need to merely take over the major suppliers of raw inputs to all products, and major finished products, and that will be enough to keep crypto only relevant on the margins.

Very hard bordering on impossible

> You will have to find a place with effectively no state

Why no state? I'm sure plenty of states would be happy to let you transact in crypto as long as you're willing to pay taxes. In fact, transacting in crypto isn't even necessary, all you need is the ability to convert crypto to local currency periodically.

> I'm sure plenty of states would be happy to let you transact in crypto as long as you're willing to pay taxes.

What is the point of cryptocurrency if your freedom can be impinged upon by being compelled to pay taxes? What's the point of it isn't the primary medium of exchange? If it's not that, then it's just a deflationary store of value, functioning like gold, which nobody uses for daily transactions, therefore of limited value.

Why would that state accommodate your ability to convert crypto into local currency that they ultimately control? The only rationale would be to hurt their presumptive rival: the state you fled.

And more importantly, even if that works at the individual level for you and a few others who work that kind of deal with a state, how does that model scale to populations of multiple 10s of millions?

Another state may allow a few people to make that personal optimization in their territory, but they won't negotiate such agreements with millions of people. If you are a rare wealthy person able to strike such a deal with a state, you are then effectively an oligarch, and part of the state power structure.

States are made of people, and people only trust other people who they believe have skin in the game.

What's the point if it's not the primary medium? I just gave you an example, taking my money elsewhere. Bank accounts can be frozen.

I think you're moving the goalpost from "crypto grants me more financial freedom" to "crypto makes me literally untouchable by governments". Nobody here is claiming the latter. I have no idea where you even got the tax evasion angle from anything I said.

> I just gave you an example, taking my money elsewhere.

Why do you think that the state that accepts you would give you anything like the market exchange rate for the cryptocurrency to their currency?

The only way would be if they had a competitive internal market for purchase of cryptocurrency, but it's not at all clear that would be the case, since in this situation, you would need asylum (a service they would be providing to you) more than they need your cryptocurrency. That would come at a price.

You could try to play these countries off one another to get the best possible exchange rate, but really, you'd have to be stupendously wealthy in crypto before those countries would begin to care enough to offer you any kind of deal.

This is just whattaboutism seeing as there's currently good crypto exchanges in every major currency, accessible from most countries. Does your argument hinge on this somehow changing everywhere?

Do you know what asylum is? I can permanently move to plenty of countries without asylum, I think you're getting a bit off track..