Payments are not speech. Find a better argument.

except that sometimes they reduce to speech. especially in cases where there are incidental human rights violations suppressing those payments. the examples why this cannot be left up to arbitrary governments are abundant. so there's nothing wrong with my argument. if you disagree then please show proof.

by the way just a heads up I suggest you learn the value of basic human kindness in your manner.

My definition of basic human kindness includes NOT shilling and trying to defend and justify get-rich-quick pyramid schemes and fraudulent scams, under the pretense of not wanting to pay your taxes.

Speech is the use of language to communicate ideas and thoughts. A payment is not speech. Paying involves transmitting of a financial asset. It doesn't involve the use of language to communicate ideas and thoughts. Therefore, it's not speech. You can't arbitrarily decide that something is speech, just because it suits your interests. This is not how things work.

of course it uses language. it's called a protocol for a reason. god this debate is tiresome.

Whatever. Good luck convincing anyone that a financial transaction is speech.

I don't need to, mr. creates-strawmen-to-try-to-avoid-the-real-discussion. Many people already hold the view that certain financial activities reduce to the freedom to speak or pursue happiness. It didn't come from me. Good luck convincing anyone that you've ever experienced real threats to your human rights.

Of course it didn't come from you. It came from the bitcoin ideologues. You simply repeat what they say like a parrot.