Bitcoin And The Boston Tea Party

The Boston Tea Party was a seminal event in the dawning history of the United States, and is widely considered to be one of the key sparks that led to the American Revolution. The now infamous political protest of December 16, 1773, pitted frustrated American colonists against the imperial British motherland and culminated in the dumping of 342 chests of tea, worth around 10,000 pounds, into the Atlantic Ocean. This essay will examine the surprising similarities between this historic protest and modern fiat dumping for Bitcoin, but first, a refresher on our history.

The primary motivation for the Boston Tea Party was the issue of taxation without representation. The British government had passed several taxes on the American colonies, including the Sugar Act of 1764, which levied a tax on sugar, and the Stamp Act of 1765, which imposed a tax on printed materials. These taxes were unpopular among the American colonists, who believed they were being unfairly taxed without having a voice in the British government.

Furthermore, the Tea Act of 1773, which allowed the British East India Company to sell tea directly to the American colonies without paying the usual duties, only added to the colonists’ frustrations. American merchants who had previously sold tea in the colonies were now at a disadvantage, as the British East India Company could offer tea at a lower price. The colonists saw this as yet another example of Britain’s attempts to control their lives and exploit them for profit.

The Boston Tea Party was organized by a group of patriots known as the Sons of Liberty, led by Samuel Adams. The Sons of Liberty saw the Tea Act as an attack on their rights as British subjects, and they believed that the only way to resist the British government’s attempts to control their lives was through direct action. On the night of December 16, 1773, a group of colonists disguised as Mohawk Indians boarded three British East India Company ships in the Boston Harbor and dumped 342 chests of tea into the ocean.

The British government quickly responded in 1774 with passage of the Coercive Acts, also known as the Intolerable Acts, which closed the port of Boston, punished Massachusetts for the tea party, and gave British officials the right to quarter (lodge) in private homes. The Intolerable Acts only served to further inflame tensions between the British government and the American colonies, and many colonists saw them as a blatant attempt to crush dissent and assert control over the colonies.

The Boston Tea Party was a turning point in the relationship between Britain and its American colonies. It was a clear demonstration of the colonists’ determination to resist Britain’s attempts to control their lives, and it marked the beginning of a long and difficult struggle for independence. The American Revolution, which began with the Declaration of Independence in 1776, was a direct result of the frustrations and anger that had been brewing for years over the issue of taxation without representation. In my opinion, it is precisely this issue of unrepresented taxation that draws a most potent parallel to the contemporary phenomena we observe in the rise of Bitcoin.

When one considers the fiat debt death spiral and the perpetual debasement of currency, there is a strong case to be made that a substantial share of our taxation is, akin to the colonists, unrepresented. Consider that each time a dollar is printed, the pre-existing dollars are respectively debased. This occurs because the creation of a new dollar unit increases dollar supply. Assuming demand remains equal, the price of all dollars must go down. This simple supply-demand economics is what largely explains the long ~100 year march of the dollar toward zero.

The fault for money printing lies not at the foot of any one man, but at all our feet. The issue is a chronic condition of systemic malconstruction where future printing is required for the incurrence of new debt burdens. The United States has maintained global reserve status which provides cover for this abnormality but this status is temporary. Meanwhile, the unfortunate result is a citizenry reliant on a state issued fiat currency programmed to go to zero. This citizenry, naive to the systemic cause, repeatedly votes for new leaders in an attempt to provide a solution which usually involves some form of money printing to temporarily alleviate the burden. However, this only feeds the systemic root cause even further until the cycle repeats.

Occasionally, unelected central bankers are involved in the inflation of the money supply which is where most ethical issues arise. In this case, the debasement is unrepresented through the electoral process and is most akin, though in an entirely different form, to the experience of the early American colonists. It is this parallel that suggests a comparison between the dumping of tea and the dumping of fiat. The average citizen is waking to the reality that their hard-earned savings is nothing more than a promissory debt derivative programmed for debasement. Meanwhile, glistening in cyberspace, a new form of supply inelastic money is ascending the dominance hierarchy and offers a perpetual temptation to dump fiat into the heart of the sea and sail for new lands.

In conclusion, the Boston Tea Party was a significant event in the early history of the United States, and it remains an important symbol of the American spirit of independence and determination. The event was caused by the colonists’ growing frustration with Britain’s attempts to control their lives, particularly through the taxation of their goods and the increasing regulation of their commerce. The Boston Tea Party was a bold act of resistance that marked the beginning of the American Revolution, and it remains an inspiration to people around the world who are fighting for their rights and freedoms. The rise of Bitcoin remains a contemporary phenomena, but perhaps what we observe here is our second invitation to a historic tea party.