Detailing discussions by questioning definitions doesn’t help advance your point. A black market is a market that is illegal, not just a market that you personally don’t approve of. Governments are doing what their laws say they can, trying to disambiguate between “right” and “privilege” doesn’t change this.
Your point seems to be “they can’t do that because I don’t like it”, which is the basis of a political movement, not a discussion of what can actually legally be done right now.
KYC laws are pretty universal, they’re not going away because you say they shouldn’t be real.
You are not obligated to follow a law purely because it exists. I realise you will immediately jump to the alternative here but you should take a step back and consider the implications of being obligated to follow any harebrained, harmful and sometimes downright evil law that has ever existed.
Legal and ethical are not the same thing. If a law is any of the above things plus unenforceable I would argue it makes zero sense to obey it.
You're obligated to follow a law because if you don't someone will hit you with you a stick, kidnap you, and lock you in a tiny room. You're right that governments don't have "rights." They have abilities.
Exactly. Which is why I also added unenforceable. The government can make idiotic evil and harmful laws till the cows come home, and history shows that indeed they do.
The value in innovations like cryptocurrency are about making a particular class of the above idiotic laws unenforceable, to the extent they are successful. Other similar products exist which make other forms of law similarly unenforceable, for example Tor for dissidents in totalitarian regimes looking to smuggle information into or out of their open air prison camps, etc.
The harder agencies try that produce and attempt to enforce these fundamentally unenforceable laws, over time, the less able they will be to do so, because the nature of cryptography is that the mathematics massively favours the defender to such an extent that even the lumbering behemoths we have in nation states are inadequate to breach it if done correctly. The best they can do is breach supporting infrastructure around it, which just ends up as an evolutionary fitness function for the removal of such vulnerable supporting infrastructure, until they end up creating the monster they simply can't kill.
Which is fortunate, because I dread to imagine a world they actually had the absolute power they so desperately covet.
Your point seems to be “they can’t do that because I don’t like it”, which is the basis of a political movement, not a discussion of what can actually legally be done right now.
KYC laws are pretty universal, they’re not going away because you say they shouldn’t be real.