Communism isn’t all that different

I’m from Eastern Europe. Back when the Soviet Union was around, no one could own anything privately; everything belonged to the state. They decided how much food you got, let you use state-owned homes in return for your work, set prices for selling goods, and controlled how much you could buy. So here’s my question. When you put all your life savings into buying a house, does it really become yours? How is it different from what the Soviets did? Sure, they had your ownership rights on paper, and now we just have them in digital records. But is it REALLY that much different? You don’t actually own it. It's just the government’s promise to let you use it and keep out those who shouldn’t be there, until they decide otherwise. The only real thing you own is bitcoin. Everything else is just a promise.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make in your post, OP, but what I do know is that any cryptocurrency we buy besides Bitcoin that is in our non-custodial wallets can be considered to be truly under our control. Because if we buy Bitcoin or cryptocurrency but store it in a centralized exchange, we don't have 100% control of our assets there. We are only given the authority to access them, which is no different from a bank that can freeze our account at any time. Unlike non-custodial wallets, they can't do that, and the same goes for DEX platforms, as long as we hold the seed phrase of our account address.

Anywhere in the world, everything is a form of rent. Even when you buy something and hold the property, in practice you’re just paying to use it during the time you live. After we die, things are left for other people. Nothing is truly ours. The only real form of ownership might be Bitcoin. But while we’re here, that’s how it is: once life ends, so does our right over anything. That’s why I think it’s not worth getting too attached to this idea, otherwise a person ends up falling into paranoia.

In the case of property or land, you never truly possess your property since there are taxes, rules and the state can still take it away provided there are some conditions. More like you are leasing it out of the system as long as you can maintain the rules. With Bitcoin this is not the case as no one can relieve you of it provided you have control of your keys. That is where the difference is. The first relies on the trust within the government, the second merely relies on yourself and the network.

Well I get your point and it's a valid one. But the difference between the Soviets and us is simply that we can decide not to labor and your home will still be yours. Yes I believe that no one truly owns a landed property because if the government for any reason needs to use it they can do it. But under the law, you are legally the owner of that portion of land.. Bitcoin is far different from this because we don't need to depend on the government for storage. You literally are in charge of what ever happens to your coins. So if you fail to store it well, you literally would loss it..

Freedom is the answer to your question. Communism control the financial freedom of its citizens through setting rules and limits on what you can use which means you will have the same properties even if you work harder than others. On other type of government such as democracy, people have a freedom to do whatever they like and live on their own in exchange to paying taxes to the government that run the country public services.

Both capitalism and communism make the individual to a manager of promises. In communism, your life is run by the state. In capitalism you deal with debt, taxes, credit ratings. In both, autonomy is rationed. The first serious alternative that is not rationed in centuries is Bitcoin. It is just there, without caring about your identity, your passport or your ideology Whether property under capitalism is different or not, the Soviet model is not the real provocation. Whether we are gaslighting ourselves on ownership or not. Perhaps the most we have ever really owned is what we can get without permission. Bitcoin is that. Your house does not

Look. There's a big difference with the Bitcoin you can own if you live in capitalism and communism. If living in communist country only make you able to invest $500 per month, if you live in capitalist country, it vary from $0-$99999+. There's also a difference with the way you live, if you can't hire a housekeeper in communist country, you can hire housekeeper, babysitter, personal driver, personal coach etc if you're successful in capitalist country.

I understand your point, most things that we own are controlled one way or another by the government, they can decide that they need the potion of your property for development or whatever and you cannot fight them. They can decide to regulate an industry that you have interest in and you cannot also do anything about it, you have ownership but the government have an overall ownership of everything within their sovereignty. Bitcoin is different because it is decentralized and that is why many governments were against it until some of them started to see that it is a store of value and now they are gradually accepting it. Bitcoin is truly freedom and privacy for it's holders, as long as it is in a none custodial wallet and you have your seed phrase only you have a total control of it.

Rationally thinking about this and I feel you’re somewhat right and but the thought is quite ridiculous and will sound obsolete to some hearing and understanding but I would say that it might seem not too different for real but it is, buying off a property right now is like paying a Permanent rent to the government through who ever is in charge of it, where your linage could hold to it and say it’s there ancestral home, I don’t really know how it’s done in your part of the Europe but where I’m from you know a property it’s more like a registration for permanency even though the government comes to take it away from you either through development then you will get compensated for it. Let’s assume you own a bitcoin as you claim it the only assets one can truly own, you’re prone to hacks and other kinds of threat so if you get attacked you may not not truly only the bitcoin no more. Airs just some complicated stuff

The biggest difference is, in communism, the party decides who lives a better life. You think in soviet Russia EVERY house was exactly the same, oligarchs of that era, the party big members, lived better than normal regular people. Plus, whoever was more loyal to the party, got the better position, instead of just merit. In capitalism, you can be wealthy, some people are, but not all, just like the poor of communist, the poor of capitalist lives the same life, at the bottom, nothing changes. Look at USA, homeless, drunk, drugged, terrible living conditions at the bottom, soviet Russia actually had better bottom than that. BUT, humanity decides who gets rich, Elon got rich because we bought his cars, not because he was loyal to the party.

I think the key difference is in choice. Bitcoin is unique in that sense because it flips the arrangement no one can seize it, inflate it or dictate its use without your consent. It’s the closest thing we have to pure self-sovereign property. The difference between state property and modern ownership is more about degree than kind but Bitcoin really does stand apart as something fundamentally different.

Capitalism gives everyone the opportunity to work hard and climb the social ladder to the top. People go to the US poor and they put in much effort and within a few years, they are millionaires. I know it doesn't sound easy the way I said it but such things happen. You can hardly find an African billionaire in Russia but there are plenty in the US and Europe.  My country practices capitalism but the land also belongs to the government. You are given a certificate of occupancy and not a certificate of ownership. But the difference is that I can decide what I want to do with my house or land with less control. I can make decisions on selling and renting the house without much influence from the government. But you still don't own it because you need permission for almost everything you want to do with the land. The difference is that in communism the control is very strict.    You are correct, Bitcoin is not controlled by any government and it gives full rights of ownership. You can move your Bitcoin to any country and still have full ownership.

It depends on the government policies, in my country if I won the land then it's completely belong to me but there is nothing stopping the government if they want to take it and I have no other choice and most of the time they don't even give the right compensation for it and that's almost same for everywhere even if you own both the land and house still government can take it. Gold is yours to,o right? But anyone remember Executive Order 6102, issued by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1933, "That order required all U.S. citizens to turn in their gold coins, bullion, and gold certificates to the Federal Reserve in exchange for paper dollars at a fixed rate of $20.67 per ounce." So if the government wants to take what is in their citizens possession then they can take it in one way or the other but good things with bitcoin is digital so as long as you are not leaking your bitcoin possession data to government by KYCing to centralized platforms and using it on your primary wallet linking that reveals what is under your possession so if you want them not to take away wha is yours then keep your main stash away from your KYC linked addresses.

OP correctly noticed the similarity. Of course, strictly speaking, there has never been a single communist country. There were socialist countries. That's a very big difference. So, in fact, socialism differs from capitalism in that under socialism, instead of many capitalists/oligarchs, there is only one giant capitalist. This is the state itself. Legal opportunities that were absent under socialism were replaced by illegal opportunities. Since at least half of the country's economy was shadow (and this is typical for all socialist countries).

Maybe you don't understand property rights, especially as you seem to confused on the topic, but I guess it also depends on which country you live in. Many developed countries will have quite strong legal systems and independent judges who do not bend to changing government politicians. I'm not sure why you think bitcoin, which most people will generally store on a physical device, is any safer against government seizure. The fact that you say the soviet system the government assigned you housing, like it was some special gift that a citizen should be grateful for and could be ripped away at any moment, shows quite a brainwashed mindset. If you do not support the singular government, however broken and corrupt it was, your right to live in a house would cease to exist - that is completely different to a capitalist system where you'd have a fighting chance to keep your paid off home.

There is a big difference between communism/socialism and capitalist system (considering its current model in western countries). You own your house and it's your right to sell or make improvements on it. There are legal guarantees on that matter. And in case the government for some reason doesn't respect your right to private property, it means they are breaking the legal terms which rule the country, so they are going outlaw. Therefore, it's not the same capitalist model we are talking anymore, but a subversion of it, perpetrated by the government in dictatorial and abusive manners. So it's more accurate to compare that hypothetical model to communism/socialist, instead of comparing to our current capitalist one.

You already answered the question you asked if you go through your first paragraph. In communism, everything belong to the state and if your country is not practicing communism now but capitalism, then if you buy a home it is yours and truly yours if you got all the necessary approvals and papers. My country practices fake capitalism, fake because they can still cook up something to steal your natural resources and land, yet we still have right to sue the government when they try to encroach and they will plead for out of court settlement. So it depends on the country you come from and how well the people in power respect their laws and institutions.

I think it is in poor taste to equate communism to capitalism. A lot of people who lived in communism can tell you all about how unfair, corrupt and destructive communism really is. In communism the state not only owns all the things but they also own your life. And if they decide you must die, then you will not be given a choice. In theory, it could work if the ones making the decisions were not human themselves and had no desire to enrichen their own lives. But that is what happens under communism. Everyone is equal but some are more equal than others.

Yeah after buying it becomes yours and the government does not have rights over it except there was a construction by the government that could extend up to the place you have the property and even so the government will still pay for the house and other things that might be there before they would claim possession of the property. You can only pay and it remains the government property when is the property they built for revenue, were someone would pay to stay on the property for the years they paid for and after then they take back possession. If is not allowed for individual to own a house in your country that is not how it is in my own country because everybody is allowed so long as you have the money.