Utopian vision? I have nothing of the sort. Bitcoin doesn't make the world perfect, and a libertarian world in which freedom is respected would not be a perfect world either.

And there is a very good strategy to achieve "our aims" (though you've already made a mistake in thinking all libertarians have the same aims). My strategy is this: build Bitcoin. I'm not destroying anything, I'm building. I'm building an alternative to the decrepit system we now use.

And nobody is hoping that anything "magically rebuilds." Rather, some of us understand that it is man's natural tendency to build, and that the extent to which coercive elements of society are removed is the extent to which man can best build and create. It's not magic, it's nature.

What IS wishful thinking is the Statists who, for some reason, think that a group of men can plan the economic relationships of millions of people. What IS wishful thinking is the Statists who believe the unending printing of money can actually create real wealth.

The libertarians are not the ones destroying anything. They are not the ones bombing, building machines of war and destruction, and crushing the spirits of millions of otherwise creative people with regulations and fallacious dogma. Those who are involved in Bitcoin are trying to build something crucially important. There is very much a strategy to it, and no magic is involved. Markets work because of the natural tendencies of humans, and we're demonstrating this every day we continue forward.

Well said.  This very, very obvious point is often missed.

a) ruthless, tribal governments (organically arise)
b) centralized, highly organized governments

take your pick.  People will never be civil enough to sustain ancap.

I concede that maybe you won't be civil enough.  I, my loved ones, and pretty much everyone I interact with on a daily basis, will be, because we are civil already, and we are civil not because but despite threats.  We civil human beings outnumber people like, perhaps, you, probably 25 to 1.

My observation to you: if you fear death in such a world order without violent authorities, perhaps you would like to learn to be civil before it takes place?  Since not being civil will certainly cost you your life in ancap society, it pays off to learn civility.

Generally speaking I completely agree with the conclusion of your response, but there is one point you make which is just flat out wrong:

"The origin of money is barter. In fact, money derives directly and unavoidably from barter."

Nowhere in recorded history has money ever derived from barter. It has always derived from credit or the need for mobilization of armies. http://www.amazon.com/Debt-First-5-000-Years/dp/1933633867

Don't argue with me, argue with David Graeber and history.

I don't have to do either.  history is already on my side, just not in Graeber's mind.  You made this reference, it's up to you to argue that it's correct.  I don't personally care what you believe, but to just say "Graeber says this" is committing the 'appeal to authority' falacy using someone I do't even view as a an authority on the matter.

I don't mind that you deleted the posts - I'll take that as acknowledgement rather than a clear abuse of power.

For clarification - I said credit OR the mobilization of armies.

I suppose we will agree to disagree on this point in general. I simply do not agree that there has ever been such a thing as a "barter economy" nor that it has escalated from such a thing to a monetary economy. I, like graeber choose to use physical evidence, rather than masturbatory intellectualism to fill in the blanks of history.