The Problem: The Disastrous Effectiveness of the "Hijacked" Narrative

We've all heard it. Over and over:

"Bitcoin was hijacked by bcash."

"Bitcoin's name was stolen by bcash supporters."

"Bitcoin Cash is not Bitcoin."

"bcash is a scam."

"Bitcoin Cash is fraud."

"Bitcoin Cash is an alt-coin."

"bcash bcash bcash."

There is no doubt that these comments are influencing crypto new-comers and those who haven't been around long enough to get off the fence and choose a side. They are causing people to hesitate in their adoption of Bitcoin Cash and they are turning others away from it entirely. The effect has been the forestalling of Bitcoin Cash adoption.

Slowing the adoption of Bitcoin Cash would not be much of an issue if the implications were not so dire for so many people. Bitcoin Cash has the power to improve, and even save, many millions, perhaps billions, of lives around the world by bringing people, en masse, out of life-threatening poverty (see Roger Ver's talks on the importance of economic freedom to human life). Bitcoin Core (BTC) does not have this ability and most likely never will due to the crippling changes and decisions made by its leadership, especially the limits they've placed on transaction throughput. And, it is Bitcoin Core and its supporters who are manufacturing and spreading this disastrous "hijacked" narrative far and wide.

It is no stretch to say that they are harming millions, possibly billions, of marginalized, impoverished people and are killing those on the margins of the margins (I may write more on this at a later date as some seem to scoff at it).

The Problem With The Problem: Core's Sloppy Thinking

The biggest flaw in the Bitcoin Core "hijacked" narrative is that it is false .

Dishonesty is bad enough and shouldn't be tolerated. But, dishonesty that harms vast numbers of innocent people has to be counteracted.

How do we know unequivocally, with complete certainty, beyond any reasonable doubt that the "hijacked" narrative is a lie and that Bitcoin Cash has neither stolen Bitcoin's name nor hijacked anything? Satoshi has never said Bitcoin was hijacked. Satoshi has never said Bitcoin's name was stolen. That's the end of the story. Case closed.

Why does this close the case? Because, if anyone has the right to claim ownership of Bitcoin's name, code, or the Bitcoin project as a whole, it is its creator : Satoshi Nakamoto. No one else.

"Stealing" and "hijacking" are nearly synonymous. They hold in common that they both mean to seize a thing from its owner against the owner's will. If the owner of a thing does not object to others' use of it, it is neither stealing nor hijacking when others use it. This is a matter of simple logic.

One piece of evidence demonstrating that Satoshi didn't mind if others did whatever they wanted with Bitcoin, and perhaps even desired for them to do so, is that he released it under the MIT license ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_License ) which explicitly allows the software to be used by anyone for any purpose, commercial or otherwise.

But, they will object, the Bitcoin name is not covered under the MIT license. What about that? Satoshi could have registered "Bitcoin" as a Trademark but, never did. If he didn't want anyone else to use the name, wouldn't he have registered it as a Trademark? The fact is, he didn't.

Or, they will say, Satoshi could object to Bitcoin Cash, but we don't know what he really thinks because he's chosen to remain silent. Couldn't he just be keeping his objection to himself? What about that? The previous two pieces of evidence suggest otherwise. And, if Bitcoin Cash were a big enough problem in Satoshi's mind, he has a big enough microphone that he could quickly make us all aware of his thoughts. But, he hasn't done so.

Or, they'll object, Satoshi could be dead so, why should we just assume he's okay with Bitcoin Cash? Because, it's reasonable to assume Satoshi has or had enough intelligence to understand that all men are mortal and that, being mortal, if he had any important message regarding how Bitcoin or its name should or shouldn't be used, he ought to get that message out in a timely manner, or forever hold his peace. But, he has never put out any message from which we could reasonably conclude that he objected to Bitcoin Cash or its name.

All of these major pieces of evidence demonstrate Satoshi is perfectly fine with, and perhaps even loves , Bitcoin Cash. And, there is no evidence to the contrary. So, what should we conclude?

If a Bitcoin Core supporter is to make a contradicting claim, it is he or she who bears the burden of proof. If he or she insists that Bitcoin was hijacked or its name was stolen but, cannot demonstrate where Satoshi has shown or stated objection to Bitcoin Cash or its name, there is only one conclusion to be drawn: This person is lying. This person is dishonest. This person is perpetrating a deadly fraud.

The Solution: You, Your Mind, Your Clarity, Your Voice

There is a simple, but not easy, solution to the "hijacked" narrative. It is to counteract the lies with a new true narrative. Using logic, being conscious of where the burden of proof lies, and adhering to the plain meaning of words are our greatest weapons. But, weapons have to be used to be effective. And, if we are to win this battle, it is up to you to use those weapons; it is up to you to spread this message however you can.

Here's how I express the new, true narrative (and encourage you to do the same):