Don't get too riled up about this. "Arizona" introduced nothing. State Senator Rogers did. It's probably not going to make it out of committee in the AZ legislature. I'd be surprised if anyone took it seriously.
Edit: maybe someone knowledgeable can chime in; I don't think states can even do this. The US Government determines what is legal tender in the US.
I was really confused for a moment, I confused Oath Keepers for Promise Keepers...
Oath Keepers is an American far-right[1] anti-government militia[1][2] whose members claim to be defending the Constitution of the United States.[3] It encourages its members to disobey orders which they believe would violate the U.S. Constitution. Research on their membership determined that two thirds of the Oath Keepers are former military or law enforcement, and one tenth are active duty military or law enforcement. Most research determined the Oath Keeper membership to be approximately 5,000 members, while leaked data showed Oath Keeper rosters claiming membership of 38,000
Promise Keepers is an Evangelical Christian parachurch organization for men. It originated in the United States, but independent branches have also been established in Canada and New Zealand.
Promise Keepers describes its goal as "to bring about revival through a global movement that calls men back to courageous, bold, leadership. We will be the spark that calls men back to God’s Word, sharing their faith and caring for the poor and oppressed throughout the world."[2] Promise Keepers is a non-profit organization, not affiliated with any Christian church or denomination. It opposes same-sex marriage, and champions chastity and marital fidelity and the man as being head of the household. Its most widely-publicized events tend to be mass rallies held at football stadiums and similar venues.
I can rightly claim that the First Amendment seems to mean I can found a religion that features human sacrifices at church every Sunday, but I'll be fairly rapidly shut down if I try it.
I guess the one thing about hard-core Trumpets that's saved us is that most of them are so loony as to be ineffective, politically speaking. Imagine the damage these folks could have done if they were competent!
I mean first step. Even if it makes it somehow to a vote and doesn’t make it or is overruled due to legal concerns, it’s a step and a pointer to the recognition it has amassed.
A Central American University survey conducted last September found that nine out of 10 citizens in the country didn’t know what bitcoin was, and eight out of 10 said they had little to no confidence in the digital cash.
The English-speaking media is way behind on the general sentiment regarding Bitcoin in El Salvador.
Most Salvadorans I know are enthusiastic about Bitcoin. Any opposition fizzled once those who had no experience or were confused by it saw no change to their daily lives when it became available.
The politics of El Salvador have changed pretty drastically in the past few years with the election of Nayib Bukele and the subsequent dominance of his Nuevas Ideas party in the assembly. The traditional left (FMLN) and right (ARENA) parties were completely voted out.
My guess is that Bukele's plan with Bitcoin is more political--he's inviting a new class of crypto-rich that he can play off against the influence of what remains of "las catorce familias," i.e. the remains of the entrenched oligarchy that allied itself with the neoliberals. From the point of view of political economy, the adoption of Bitcoin is a smart move in the current situation, where the USD only benefits the old power structures that control imports and services, and where a move back to the colón is no longer feasible after the decimation of the export agro-economy (coffee, sugar, corn).
An analogy I hear often from Salvadorans is that El Salvador could become a Latin American Singapore, with Nayib Bukele as a kind of Lee Kuan Yew.
Comments
Don't get too riled up about this. "Arizona" introduced nothing. State Senator Rogers did. It's probably not going to make it out of committee in the AZ legislature. I'd be surprised if anyone took it seriously.
Edit: maybe someone knowledgeable can chime in; I don't think states can even do this. The US Government determines what is legal tender in the US.
She's something of an extremist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendy_Rogers_(politician)
Wow, she is a member of the terrorist group Oath Keepers.
I was really confused for a moment, I confused Oath Keepers for Promise Keepers...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_Keepers
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promise_Keepers
(funny enough wikipedia has a warning, "not to be confused with Oath Keepers", might be time for a rebranding)
Couldn't that also be stated as "It encourages its members to obey the law"?
The law as they (weirdly) interpret it.
It's a https://www.theonion.com/area-man-passionate-defender-of-wha... scenario.
I can rightly claim that the First Amendment seems to mean I can found a religion that features human sacrifices at church every Sunday, but I'll be fairly rapidly shut down if I try it.
All law is based on interpretation. Ultimately it's the courts interpretation that matters.
The word 'believe' is doing a _lot_ of heavy lifting there, however.
Promise Keepers performs their acts of terrorism the proper way. Through campaign donations and politicking.
I highly doubt Promise Keepers has ever given any campaign contributions. Are you just making this up?
Maybe she plans to pay Cyber Ninjas with it?
I guess the one thing about hard-core Trumpets that's saved us is that most of them are so loony as to be ineffective, politically speaking. Imagine the damage these folks could have done if they were competent!
I mean first step. Even if it makes it somehow to a vote and doesn’t make it or is overruled due to legal concerns, it’s a step and a pointer to the recognition it has amassed.
Wingnut who’s legislation never even gets to committee.
https://www.billtrack50.com/legislatordetail/25708
And no, that is not legal.
[deleting, I shouldn't talk about politics from an N=1 sample size]
Not so sure Salvadoran immigrants would be keen on bitcoin... https://futurism.com/el-salvador-bitcoin-economy
The English-speaking media is way behind on the general sentiment regarding Bitcoin in El Salvador.
Most Salvadorans I know are enthusiastic about Bitcoin. Any opposition fizzled once those who had no experience or were confused by it saw no change to their daily lives when it became available.
The politics of El Salvador have changed pretty drastically in the past few years with the election of Nayib Bukele and the subsequent dominance of his Nuevas Ideas party in the assembly. The traditional left (FMLN) and right (ARENA) parties were completely voted out.
My guess is that Bukele's plan with Bitcoin is more political--he's inviting a new class of crypto-rich that he can play off against the influence of what remains of "las catorce familias," i.e. the remains of the entrenched oligarchy that allied itself with the neoliberals. From the point of view of political economy, the adoption of Bitcoin is a smart move in the current situation, where the USD only benefits the old power structures that control imports and services, and where a move back to the colón is no longer feasible after the decimation of the export agro-economy (coffee, sugar, corn).
An analogy I hear often from Salvadorans is that El Salvador could become a Latin American Singapore, with Nayib Bukele as a kind of Lee Kuan Yew.
It's just synecdoche.
I wonder if it's a pump and dump scheme? Buy BTC, introduce bill (even if it's not going anywhere), wait for it to make the news, sell your BTC.