The Bitcoin Standard obituary

Bitcoin itself has been killed off by journalists (albeit virtually) more times than we can count (over > 470 obituaries1). Each one a laughable flop as BTC rose from the ashes.
One such (rather funny) obituary was printed by a Belgian newspaper in 2017, with bitcoin hovering around 3400$ ,
declaring “The end of the bitcoin is near”, alongside some FUD and misconceptions from a journalist we didn’t hear much about anymore afterwards. May his mistake be a burden on his professional insights for a long time to come.

I've defended both bitcoin and a bitcoin standard tooth and nail, but now I'm forced to write my own eulogy.

Not for Bitcoin itself of course; that'll thrive forever or at least for the long-time foreseeable future I believe.

No, this farewell is for our beloved "Bitcoin Standard" as a mere concept. That by-product (in the form of a book and an idea) of our cult-like behavior is a tool for the so-called “orange pilling” crowd.
The accompanying book, or perceived as some as the “bible” of bitcoin, promises an economic world where a bitcoin-backed economy would thrive long-term because of inevitability.
However, it turns out to be a book that instigates a passive mindset from the interpretation many readers are left with. Which kinda opposes the bitcoin mindset.

While it contradicts itself by the argument that sound money (Bitcoin) fosters lower time preference. In essence rewarding holders as demand grows and value appreciates.
The ramifications of that statement are not explored enough (maybe an idea for Ammous: instead of writing about fiat and how it’s bad in subsequent books, write one where you actually explore the real-life implications of a hard money society based purely on bitcoin, unless I missed the book “100 year of economic expansion on the backs of passive hodlers and quiet stackers”) - I don’t hold my breath for that.

I think it's time to give this book, this idea, this institution it's a proper place in our collective bitcoin memory, next to “parabolic trav”, the “big block”ers and bitcoin’s silver to bitcoin’s gold,… along other ideas and hypes.

Because it’s a well-crafted, but misleading end goal.

In my opinion, the Bitcoin Standard was a good tool to lift up some economic insights for people who didn’t know that much about how bad fiat is (that’s well-explained in the book of course), but in the end it turned everyone on passive holders that strangle the revolution by valorization of bitcoin.
That grand illusion (sold as a destination) …
well, I have the opinion that it’s kaput, buried under hype, half-truths, inaccurate historical perspectives (like the role of credit and decree in the 19th century) and laziness on part of the community.

The author has of course no part in the downfall of the idea, he only defined it, and he did so in a way that sold many, many copies and found himself placed on top of the food chain, as one of the main thought leaders in our space.
Although some people don’t like the author (I’m neutral on the person, never met him, so can’t say).

I’m in bitcoin long enough to say it’s a fantastic book on one side (for basic economic education on hard money properties) and on the other side a heap of ideas based on a fantasy and assumptions, like a consensus built in and on bitcoin that’s possible to thrive while defining passive holders as the winners.

And these “winners” are everywhere.
Waiting for the Wall Street boys and nation states (fiat) to “pump their bags”. Applauding one-liners, buying services that let them down and a 5th hardware wallet they don’t need. And most of them don’t build, don’t thrive, don’t work, and don’t do much more than being a modern variant of techhippies.

That’s not bitcoin (in my opinion).
That’s not even proof of work anymore… from a community standpoint. That’s a heap of parasitic holders waiting to cash out in fiat. After they’re read a book that explores monetary history.

So why do I speak up now?

Well… because I saw a x post of a long queue2 of people waiting to get their copy of the book autographed at a corporate conference.

And for every one of these people, the fantasy is sold, and the pacifism in bitcoin festers further to “hold > work”. It’s not explicitly stated as such in the book of course, although I see almost anyone who reads it, turn into the most passive stackers of sats.

Bitcoin inherently rewards those with a long time preference, and for most of the audience, that’s translated to “just buy and hold”. Because that’s what they know.

It’s popular.
That’s for sure. And he’s earned it, but ask yourself ‘Which one of these people queueing up for a book signing, would ever strive to get a real bitcoin standard in place?’

Telling people about bitcoin being a hedge against government meddling, is of course clever. The audience needed to hear that in the form of a book apparently. But other than that, it gives these new bitcoiners a false hope of a new society, based on a BS standard (pun intended).
A standard that’s not technically worked out, wasn’t explained in full detail - it’s difficult to do so- and above all can only work if a real-world economy màkes it work.
That can only be handled by decree, or in a voluntary society where people work and thrive in a utopia of ideas and strong value.

So far, the first option (by decree) would make bitcoin part of a fiat-world system.
And the second option is an illusion so far away that we can’t even start to think about it. (Walk around in any big city in Europe after 10pm and you’ll see the thriving utopia of ideas pissing on trash bags and fighting rival gangs on the street).

The average street dweller doesn’t know about money.
Average people don’t know about economy and monetary policy.
Crypto-investors don’t know enough about value creation and retention.
Traditional investors don’t know about opportunity cost.
And bitcoiners usually don’t understand hard money, even if they’re sitting on it.

In a true Bitcoin Standard, Bitcoin would function as the foundational settlement layer for major institutions and central banks, prized for its capped supply, unalterable protocol, and built-in safeguard against inflation. But at the same time incentivise both working, innovation and risk-taking.
Yet, here's the irony: in such a system, inflationary pressures from fiat manipulation simply wouldn't exist to begin with, and turning more people into just passive holders of the base core value-preserving asset (bitcoin).

I've lost faith in this community to truly grasp or stewarding “hard money” bitcoin, much less building a genuine Bitcoin-centric world. One of the reasons (there are many) is the idea that this book has become our leading voice, our Bible.
Turns out our holy scripture has no miracles but just the sob stories from the sick and the dying you come across along the way to the promised land. We don’t see a future, we’re supposed to be the future. While most of the bitcoiners you encounter are living in the past. We still glue ourselves to the highway of mediocracy.

And if you're counting on nation-states or treasury firms to pave the way, you're deluding yourself completely.)

Ultimately, Bitcoin could "win" in fiat valuation while utterly failing its revolutionary promise.
Let that sink in again:
”Bitcoin can lose, while its fiat price goes up.” (avb_21)

My ideas about this book have been brewing for a while, but I couldn't say it openly (unlike JunSeth who called it one of the dumbest books he’d ever read in some podcast).

As long as the fantasy of a Bitcoin Standard could have been reality and coming through, one couldn’t critique it.
Such stance would be against bitcoin, against the community and above all would be shooting yourself in the foot. You couldn’t know for sure, until a few months ago (early 2025) actually.

Something changed when nation states, treasury companies and the likes showed up, all promising us a direction of more bitcoin adoption. An adoption where consensus is also “by decree”, with a bitcoin underlying layer, if we’re lucky.
That day… the Bitcoin Standard was for me at least, doubtful.
Now a few months later I can say I dare to declare it dead.

Proof lies in the book’s inaccuracies, ideological biases and the (true) arguments rewarding holders through rising value, stagnant transaction data, and community feedback fostering accumulation amid fiat critiques.
Holding > working is actually the main equation to reach a Bitcoin Standard it seems. And I don’t believe in that anymore.
If there is a turnaround from broken fiat3 to a Bitcoin Standard, it won’t be a grassroots movement or popular revolt. I had that dream (and the book) for a while.
That’s done.

When a base layer is bitcoin in a Bitcoin Standard, then fiat is no longer a form of inflation-engine. Why would you hedge against fiat induced inflation in a pure BS (pun intended)?

And yes, in a pure bitcoin world, there would be no one inflating the fiat amount, and we would have long term stability.
That world, in my opinion can’t be built when the majority of the people sits on their bitcoin stack and waits until some sort of revolution and adopting rolls out all by itself.

The core of the book is a fantasy, although it’s correctly defining bitcoin’s value propositions (scarcity, durability, censorship resistant etc…) but the followers and readers often turn into the most passive holders and sheep as a result of this realization.
The less they have to do for the most rewards, is what they’ll do.
Which mean most of the time: nothing.
”pump my bags màn”

They’re usually also the ones using middlemen, applauding for middlemen, or even paying (or donating to) them!

Most of them are bitcoin gadget hunters, frustrated clerks, posers, newbies and people that might as well would be queuing up for Hulk Hogan’s autograph if we were living in 1988. “Drink your milk, eat your vitamins and stack some sats, Brother”.
With the difference that the Hulkster would be actually inspiring to kids instead of running away to a whale VIP bar to complain about the many dirty people in the audience.

They’re longing to have something tangible, because they missed the boat and search for a piece of a history and profit.
In my opinion, they’re no longer thinking critically about such books and ideas, and most of them are longing to be part of a fake community at a corporate conference that only supports middlemen and the enemies of hard money.
They get the occasional new hardware wallet on top, just to be sure of their “independency” (good luck picking the right supply chain).

Holy stacks

This book is the consecrated bread used in the Eucharist of a proof-of-stake mindset that’s creeping into bitcoin.
It’s a compelling story with holes. Nothing more. It needs an additional layer , and that layer will be written one day. We’ll see when and how.

Bitcoin itself will thrive, and be stacked by many… while the Bitcoin Standard is just a revolution “around the horizon”, that can’t come to fruition any time soon. Just like the old communist in a bar that still thinks the masses will overthrow the elites “any moment now”. While he cashes his welfare check.

So will many self-proclaimed bitcoiners have the Bitcoin Standard gathering dust on their bookshelves, alongside barely cracked copies of some beginner’s guide to Technical Analysis and “Mastering Bitcoin” by Andreas M. Antonopoulos, each marked by an Amazon cardboard bookmark stranded somewhere between two of the first 30 pages.

But you’re a bitcoiner now, huray.
You have a signed copy of a book, you hold the asset.
You stack sats. Maybe you run some node.
You can go sit down now,
right?

No.
Because the revolution won't hodl itself.

by AVB_21
if you support me sharing writing/thoughts:
allevoorbitcoin.be/donate