DEBATE: CAN BITCOIN RESIST THE STATE? w/ Alex Gladstein & Fictitious Capital

— Bitcoin's role as a neutral, scarce monetary technology versus its capacity to drive systemic socioeconomic transformation; disagreement on causality of change (technology-driven vs. society-driven).

— "Big bad adoption thesis": whether Wall Street and state adoption undermines or facilitates Bitcoin's liberatory potential; comparison to the Trojan horse theory.

— Micro versus macro scaling challenges: evidence of Bitcoin mining improving energy access in African microgrids does not necessarily translate to solving global energy poverty or labor exploitation at systemic levels.

— War finance, labor arbitrage, and energy poverty as potential second-order effects of Bitcoin adoption under a fixed monetary standard.

— Difference between Bitcoin as a feature-rich technology and as a solution to root causes of exploitation; whether monetary reform addresses underlying power structures or merely redistributes access to capital.

— Recognize that Bitcoin's technical properties (scarcity, censorship-resistance, neutral settlement) enable real human rights benefits for individuals in restricted or conflict zones, independent of broader geopolitical adoption debates.

— Evaluate Bitcoin adoption within local ecosystems (microgrids, diaspora remittances) separately from macro-level claims about state monetary sovereignty or global trade restructuring; scaling mechanisms remain unproven.

— Consider incentive alignment as a driver of Bitcoin adoption by institutional actors: profit motive in frontier energy markets or emerging economies may produce positive spillovers (rural electrification) even without philanthropic intent.