1. That means all those solidarity nonsenses and such. Cold fact is that there is no value that does not "show" it self. For example solidarity has never brought anything good. Simply I mean things that are "beliefs" rather than something with "true value". With economical I mean all this "money must be earned" bs and so on.

I had to restart reading this a few times until i realised you meant individuality but were saying solidarity. I don't know if English is your first language but solidarity doesn't have exactly the same meaning. To be honest I'm having a hard time understanding what you mean. It makes it difficult to know exactly how much and how we disagree agree, or alternatively if we DO agree but you're just using different word. ^_. So do correct me if I misunderstand you.

I assume you're replying to my first question in my last rely. You didn't really answer my question.... I asked how would so-called "false values" be abolished and I asked who would decide. What you said could imply something quite authoritarian so just trying to figure out if it's that or not.

You gave an example of one of these false values, individualism. *"That means all those solidarity nonsenses and such"... but you're going to need to be a bit more specific. I'm still not sure what you think you mean by individualism

"With economical I mean all this "money must be earned" bs and so on."

Are you saying that crypto is showing us a totally different way of seeing money and how we define value and what that means? If so, I agree! If instead this is more of a anti-capitalist thing then I don't, because it involves a great lack of understanding for what money is and represents.

I don't mean some past ideology or ideas. I mean people who are outcasts of this current system, like unemployed, crypto-enthuastists and people who don't labor much. Simply people who do not "exist" in this current economical understanding.
I said "individualism" not "individual". Individualism as philosophy must be abolished simply because it looks only at individual, and takes everything outside of it as granted, like society for example. Individualism needs to be abolished because it ignores anything greater than our own perspective.

hmm...I'm really struggling to connect the first part of this paragraph to the second part.

You called them dead but why did you use that word? I'm wondering if it's important or if it's just confusing me.

If you mean that that the transfer of wealth, from the old money with a long lineage in things like oil and banking to the technology entrepreneurs , will mean the most powerful economic people in the world will now have a drastically different perspective and so effect on the world going forward. If so I really agree! It's very exciting. In old money the passion that created the money is too distant and too divorced from their current wealth to be meaningful anymore, now they stagnate in the system. All companies end up like this the larger they get. The more it expands the more corrupt it gets and the more it edges toward it;s own collapse.

So what we're seeing with cypto is that people who are full of passion to change things with technology and find new solutions to problems with different ways of looking at things, they're gaining vast amounts of economic power that would normally take a long time and a lot of conflicts of interest corrupting the purity of it all.

As far as individual vs individualism, can you give some more examples Im not getting it,.

.