“There was something strange in my sensations, something indescribably new and, from its very novelty, incredibly sweet. I felt younger, lighter, happier in body; within I was conscious of a heady recklessness, a current of disordered sensual images running like a mill race in my fancy, a solution of the bonds of obligation, an unknown but not an innocent freedom of the soul.”

Bitcoin is for criminals, bitcoin will boil the oceans and the government are going to ban it anyway, unless it goes to zero first. These are a small sample of the lines that are often thrown around when bitcoin is introduced into a conversation after one finally feels comfortable with one’s own views to share with polite company that “yes, I own some bitcoin, and I actually find it an interesting and important topic”. Following such an encounter or similar, it becomes logical that the next time similar situations arise, you may decide to keep that bit of information to yourself. It may not be the right thing to do, but at least it should be able to maintain a degree of civility with those around you who have watched you grow into the pillar of society that we are told we should aspire to being. But just because we decide to not shout from the roof tops that “technology is deflationary” and the “fiat system is literally killing us”, does not mean this part of us has to be put out to pasture, even if we have absolutely no intention of ever selling our stack for worthless pieces of paper.

Deciding not to be “that guy” at a dinner party.

This leads one to a strange position, where unless there are people within our in real life world that understand what we’re going through, we may continue a journey of learning and discovery by ourselves, maybe not quite in secret, but likely in private. Bitcoin is something that is important, but maybe for the time being we choose not to share this with everyone around us. Unfortunately, this decision may be viewed a secretive and potentially deceitful behaviour, why would you keep this from me, with the simple answer being I’m not ready, even if this answer is not enough. So, to maintain progress on this private journey of development, the podcasts may not be played in the car, the YouTube videos may be watched after everyone has gone to bed, all the time, this polar twin is gaining confidence with ever growing conviction, along with an almost morbid sense of shame. The risks of perceived secrecy are maintained, with the smallest of hopes that one day, the justifications and explanations will be sufficiently developed to overcome the cognitive dissonance of those close by.

But why should this be such an uncomfortable position, when the ultimate aim of so many must be “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, which bitcoin can play such a key role in achieving? The socially acceptable version thought they were succeeding until the point when the Satoshi dropped, and was able to overcome the personal resistance to a new perspective, so eloquently outlined by Croesus, they had pursued being a yuppy but had not been trapped by the mindset. Resistance to bitcoin may not simply be the complexity of a censorship resistant, decentralised computing network that confirms transactions every 10 minutes, but something more engrained that creates a barrier, a powerful resistive force, working against accepting a new monetary paradigm. The opponents’ success may have resulted from following the accepted rules, going to university, getting a good job, saving in a pension, buying a house with debt and contributing to the system through taxes; these were the rules they learnt, played by, and believed were helping them succeed. The problem is, questioning any of these accepted beliefs can create pushback to a new type of money that is not even connected to a bank. A new problem emerges that it is not, in fact, whether someone can learn something new, but have a willingness to deliberately and consciously put effort into unlearning what they thought they knew:

“You have to let it all go, Neo. Fear, doubt, and disbelief. Free your mind.” Morpheus (apologies for the mixed references)

However, the eternal question of how to orange pill your wife, uncle, sister etc, is not the primary purpose of this piece, instead to focus on how to calm any internal conflict before hyperbitcoinization arrives. Is the cry of the bitcoiner within going to be so great that there is a need to discard all that went before and pursue a new life as a fiat free farming, bitcoin artist or are the risks associated with this option simply too large, both socially and financially to take (until hyperbitcoinization anyway). While it was possible to overthrow the constraints of the fiat propaganda, the need to go feet first into the metaphorical plunge pool of bitcoin may not be an option. So hopefully, you possess skills within your currency work that can be transferred into the future bitcoin world, but also a realisation of the role bitcoin may be able to play in your current occupation to build new skills and knowledge.

Dr. Jekyll found that his comfortable, well-respected image was incompatible with Mr. Hyde’s monstrous tendencies, so found the need to take on the thick cloak of his alter ego. While calling for the end of central banking and death to fiat currencies may not be considered the consensus view, in theory at least, it should be possible to express such opinions, without the risk of being pursued by the law (unlikey Mr. Hyde). But saying this, authoritarian governments around the world show little concern for the implications of shutting down bank accounts of citizens for sharing their political views on social media. Surely it is only a matter of time until individuals begin to receive the dreaded knock at their door in the middle of the night for politely informing their audience of the futility of a particular policy or a government’s ultimate solvency. This may be written in jest, but with so many markets being built upon confidence and expectations, if enough pension managers began to realise their mandated allocation to national state debt were a guaranteed bad trade, a currency event (also see collapse/crisis) would likely ensue.

And so, while your bitcoin side may not be quite so unhinged as the devilish Mr. Hyde, the risks of unleashing him (or her), appear no less risky for today’s keyboard evangelist as it was for the fictional character of the late 19th century. The perceived need to shield ones’ primary identify and connections from this dark, more contentious persona returns, not simply to maintain order within a comfortable world, but to stay out of jail. Initially, it was Twitter, that has provided the canvas for this younger, lighter, happier part of me to open up about my views on bitcoin and its implications to the world, but only now am I realising the risks I took. Looking back on the past 3 years on NOSTR, some of which has been NOSTR only, can I appreciate how much I needed to self-censor. The anonymity/pseudonymity, combined with a disconnection from the broader centralised systems that may be able to somehow connect posts to a in real life identify, provided the “power to selectively reveal oneself to the world”. I can only imagine, shuddering at the same time, of the internal conflict that may have been taking place if the opportunity of NOSTR had not arrived in early 2024, only sharing sanitised views to other carefully curated posts.

As this bitcoin side became more confident, and the ideas that began to need sharing became more developed, so did the form of what was being posted on NOSTR. Stackchain Magazine allowed the first outing of my bitcoin self as a standalone author, but I found is hard to reconcile with my imperious desire to carry my head high, maintaining the dryness of a life of study that had required so many years of work to create. There were ideas and reflections to be shared, irrespective of whether it will harm the button-down shirt wearing, pension contributing Dr.. What is the route forward, attempting the suppress that side that feels so out of place in my day-to-day life, or risk losing control of this bitcoin empowered caricature who views “Gm Nostriches” as a totally normal greeting to a decentralised internet each morning? What may the next step be? Lose the time afforded to me to learn more about bitcoin while the fiat pay cheque can still buy a loaf of bread and keeping the ever-thinner veneer of conformity intact a few months longer? Or pursue a job in bitcoin and risk further stressing those relationships that increasingly worry about my long-term conviction in something no more tangible than ones and zeros?

No one knows the road to hyperbitcoinization, and while the fiat-less, law-less route of bitcoin anarchy may be an interesting thought experiment, it would be extremely violent, with the existing powers doing everything in their control to prevent it (likely also using the threat of or actual violence and a whole lot of fiat printing to maintain their power). This is not to say preparing for such a scenario is not a sensible use of your time; the prepper with a second passport, four months’ worth of food and ammo is only a lunatic, until they are right. I cannot and will not tell anyone what they should or could do; this would suggest a form of coercion, which I’m not prepared to do, so instead, I will share a journey I’m currently on, by attempting to allow these two sides to live in one body. As part of my job, I can write and carrying out research related to bitcoin, meaning I’m effectively supported in developing my bitcoin side. This means, I’m now presented with not only the choice of potential anarchy or the existing path, but a third option of an orange and purple pilled avenue towards greater bitcoin enlightenment.

I’ve very little interest in outing my “in real life” identify, to share my research, ideas or even a book, and cast off the NOSTR only identify that is so separate from the lecturer, standing in front of fresh faced, but ultimately disillusioned students, waiting for the opportunity to type the exam questions into ChatGPT (other LLMs are available). Unlike Dr. Jekyll in the book, these two sides are beginning to sit more comfortably together, one sitting at his desk, carefully exploring how firms attempt to create a competitive advantage, with the other happy to dunk on any politician with a take that the solution needs more government. Although there have been times where my Mr. Hyde has felt the need to express his views about the clear limitations and contradictions of the base material, my Dr. Jekyll had kinds deliberately left threads to pick up and run with. Whether the students acknowledged “researching bitcoin” in my interests in the first session, or whether they are willing to question established views, only time and their coursework submissions will tell if they were impacted by what Mr. Hyde spoke to them about.

I \[stand\] already committed to the profound duplicity of life, and so, for the time being my work within the conformity of a noted professor (well lecturer) can remain, to provide assurance to those around me that I am holding the two sides of my personality together, a little longer. I can continue to attempt to find answers and accumulate evidence to further strengthen future discussions I may have related to bitcoin, so when their curiosity (also see hearing about the price going up) pique sufficiently to risk releasing the unhinged sidekick to provide answers, they will raise the topic of bitcoin once again. However, by this point, the response can be more carefully constructed than before, maybe drawing from experiences developed through using bitcoin within an established career. For accountant, this could be whether they have helped a client appreciate the value of having an alternate medium of exchange when the banks suddenly call a bank holiday, or a plumber who installed a bitcoin miner to heat a client’s water, helping reduce their energy bill. If only my own work could provide such tangible examples, but there is potential someone learnt about bitcoin from my work and it has helped them in some way. Compared to the rest of my research, apart from it getting cited by other academics (often inaccurately), there is much less meaningful, real-world impact than anything of the bitcoin writing. If nothing else, I can pass them my copy of “A Progressive’s case for bitcoin” and offer to answer any questions they may have once they’ve finished (to return to the start, bitcoin is viewed as bad because it does bad and bad people use it, or so many people believe).

Bitcoin is not a speculation. Bitcoin is not an investment. Bitcoin may not even be the answer, unless you’re asking the right question. Bitcoin is a complex topic that can provide a mechanism for understanding aspects of the modern world that feel, at times, deliberately shielded from us, to maintain the charade that all the systems are working exactly as they should (and that is against you). As a result, explaining the problems that bitcoin is able to solve to people who may not be ready to accept what you have to say, so may not result in a positive outcome. We can instead maintain our civilised exterior of Dr. Henry Jekyll, to discuss all the news items of the day, with a good-natured demeanour, but with confidence that when just the right moment arrives, the despised and friendless Mr. Edward Hyde can emerge, but ideally deliver his lines with the calm eloquence of his honourable and distinguished counterpart. If the child of Hell’s points are able to suitably connect topics that have meaning and are important to his audience, there is potentially a slim chance they will be able to begin articulating their own questions, that are important to them, that bitcoin may be able to fix.

For further reading, see “The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” by Robert Louis Stevenson, it is a dark, gothic read, but beautifully written in rich Victorian detail, that may provide a new side of the story even if you have come across these characters in movie adaptations.