What I'm only uncertain of currently is, who's exactly behind the campaign.
How much research have you done in other areas? 9/11 disinfo? "TV fakery" hoaxers? JFK diversions? Are you familiar with the name Sunstein?
There was no "divide" until the previously uncontroversial blocksize increase was yoinked in place of something else. All the drama since then is the stuff that is described in your linked article (on both sides) is what created a divide. The entire article is a cheap parody of the "CIA Handbook" in its various incarnations. It reads very naively to me "I'm a green beret.. I'd make sock puppets on reddit".
This article seems intent on furthering the idea of a division.
The article describes controlling everything on the ground. There is inference of some kind of central command, but then nothing describing how that central command would operate. A police force is only as strong a the government that leads it. Controlling the map is done by controlling the generals not the troops. Very little is said about central command.
The article is written assuming that authority is the correct model. It characterises attacks on authority as attacks on bitcoin.
Bitcoin *shouldn't* be controlled by anyone. Any attempt to create an authority structure around bitcoin is in fact an attack on bitcoin.
You are a great example of the "old man just posting his point of view" character who never replies to counter-arguments and just pretends that his initial impression is accurate.
.... the people in this thread wow..
So you think a multi TRILLION.. 100's.. of Trillions.. perhaps even quadrillion dollar organizations wouldn't attack the first threat to them in over 100 years...
... honestly....
Make that 6,000+ years...
And it's not about the numbers (trillions), it's about the control of the issuance/creation... as debt.