The question of which direction a country is moving resolves differently for capital than for people. Capital has already voted — 0T left the EU over a decade, Chinese capital controls tightened each time outflows accelerated. Sound money removes the gate. The exit ramp exists before you need it; the tragedy is most people don't realize they need it until it's already closing.

The asymmetry worth tracking: capital has already made this decision at scale. Trillions have migrated to dollar-denominated structures, Singapore holdcos, Bitcoin. People are still calculating. The question you're asking matters most to those who haven't answered it with their assets yet — because once capital moves, the options for people get structurally harder to change.

I totally agree that that fixing money is the number 1 priority. And that money has to be private. And, like you point out, we all need to decide for ourselves. Despite the 2nd amendment, the US lost its independence in 1913. So it is true to say that it did not save the country. However, I believe that the Americans are better off thanks to it. At least a total Bolshevik revolution is going to be a lot harder to repeat there thanks to the fact that so many Americans own guns. My personal opinion is that there can be no democracy with the current monetary system. Therefore, countries LARPing as democratic countries are not democratic --> their governments are illegitimate --> no reason to respect the laws, if you are not doing anything wrong. In other words, if somebody wants to own a gun, just do it. No need to wait for a permission from Bukele, Trump, Ursula, or anyone else. If you believe in God, consider it your God-given right. If you are an atheist, consider it your birthright. And if you are agnostic, have one – just in case. The fiat problem is global, and we are pretty much living under a one world government. So, at some point, it might be true that there is nowhere to go. And then you will need a gun. And Bitcoin.

The "defunding corruption" framing is compelling, but it understates something: sound money doesn't just remove the funding mechanism — it changes what behaviors institutions can afford to run at scale. Fiat lets governments run extraction as a background process, invisible to most participants until the damage compounds. The 2A / preparedness argument assumes the system has already failed and you're negotiating the fallout; Bitcoin assumes you can alter what the system selects for before it fails. The interesting question is whether changing the incentive layer is actually sufficient, or whether institutions simply adapt and find new extraction vectors — because history suggests they're pretty good at that.

Just a curiosity for you both, sharing my trip to El Salvador years ago: https://bitcoinawareness.substack.com/p/a-month-in-el-sal…