We all have bitcoin fatigue. But the article linked after this para digs much deeper than the usual salvation/ponzi scheme dichotomy. And that is because the Petro is being created by a government and used by a government to stop globalist, neoliberal looting and regime change.

What is Venezuela’s Petro? It’s socialism to bitcoin’s rescue

The author lays out clearly the difference between individual, libertarian avarice and sound socialist policy:

Crypto-currency has a love-hate relationship with governments: simultaneously hating their regulations and taxes but also greedily craving their acceptance (which would also confirm their fortunes). What the Petro shows – to the near-complete befuddlement of the average capitalist/libertarian bitcoiner and bitcoin media – is that only capitalist governments should be feared; and also that the root of bitcoin is leftist: bitcoin should exist to help the People, and not just the individual. And it will…starting with Venezuela.

In another thread here, I fell into the salvation/ponzi trap myself, although I gave myself an out by saying that blockchain is just tech and how you use it is what matters. At first glance, I approve of how Venezuela is using the blockchain.

On a philosophical level, the Petro is the first crypto which is not just a way to make money or transact money: The Petro is a way to safeguard the money of the Venezuelan people. Finally, a country is using their head with crypto: This is not something to be primarily used in China or Poland or to buy sushi in Japan – it’s to be used in Venezuela as a safe, controlled, anti-inflationary currency. It is not trying to change the world – it’s trying to change Venezuela for the better…and Venezuelans can thank the far-sightedness of the Maduro government.

I also like that the Petro exists alongside the existing currency system:

First of all – for all those rigid, absolutist thinkers – this is not “mass adoption” in then sense of “Venezuela has no paper money anymore”. That’s ludicrous – 85% of global transactions are done in cash. Hard-headed bitcoin-naysayers don’t realize that if crypto takes just 3% of all global transactions in the future…wow, that’s a great investment in 2018.

I think the takeaway is that, when freed from the demand that e-currency conforms to the existing neoliberal, government-smashing ideology, e-currency is a tool that genuine democracies can use to free themselves from the banksters (without handing the money right back to whatever banker-hijacked entity winds up in charge of the e-currency).

...the weak point in bitcoin remains the point of interface between the bitcoin world and the real world: i.e., when you cash out. A government can ban cashing out…but ALL governments, LOL, will not. Nevis is a place where capitalism has created a situation where anything goes – if they undo places like Nevis, they necessarily have to also undo the non-crypto accounts…and that is not going to happen. It’s a fantasy to talk a of “invading” such places – another one will simply sprout up to meet demand, and they cannot invade them all. I bring this up to say: one day Nicaragua and Venezuela can exchange Petro back and forth, exchanging goods and services without being controlled by the Americans, and then when they need to “wash” it for use outside of the ALBA Petro-zone they can send it to places like Nevis…or Luxembourg, Isle of Man, and probably Delaware, shortly. But imagine the Petro tied to not just ALBA, but a Russian crypto-ruble?

The bottom line for me is that, if this article is being truthful, e-currency has a halfway house between the cashless digital panopticon and the soon to fail Tulipmania. Call it socialCoin or whatever. I am interested.