Government Pushback Evidence of Crypto’s Creeping Relevance
Government pushback against crypto is evidence of non-state issued digital currency’s growing relevance in the modern era–at least that’s according to Bloomberg’s Joe Weisenthal.
Subscribe to the Bitsonline YouTube channel for great videos featuring industry insiders & experts
If They’re Shooting at You, You Know You’re Doing Something Right
Speaking on Bloomberg News about layoffs at crypto exchanges as a result of falling crypto trade volumes, Weisenthal suggested that the revolutionary and disruptive nature of cryptocurrencies was directly resulting in governments and government agencies taking moves to curtail them:
“… if you look at the sort of ideology or ethos of cryptocurrency, a lot of it is about decentralization, disrupting the dominant role that central banks have in money creation, circumventing the existing banking system…”
India’s Supreme Court Postpones Ruling on Central Bank’s Crypto Ban
When asked about the recent Indian Supreme Court decision, (which in fact was not a decision, but a postponement of the hearing), Weisenthal conceded state hostility wasn’t helpful:
“People in the industry obviously aren’t crazy about it when regulators come and crack down and limit the ability of trading and transacting and so forth…”
The premise of the question was factually inaccurate but the sentiment of Weisenthal’s argument held true. He pointed out that governments, central banks, and courts banning or severely hampering crypto was evidence that the industry was on the right track. On government hostility toward the nascent industry, Weisenthal argued:
“I would be more concerned if I were in the space if governments weren’t reacting negatively, because that would imply that the goal of the whole space is being unfulfilled.”
Cryptocurrency Would Appear to Have an Ally in the European Parliament
Godfrey Bloom’s scorching May 2013 speech in the European parliament acts as somewhat of a prelude to cryptocurrency’s viability in finance, if for no other reason than flaws in the traditional banking model. Bloom spoke primarily of the three ills of fractional reserve banking (which allows banks to lend money they don’t have), quantitative easing, and central banks’ ability to set interest rates.
The first he labeled “a criminal scandal”, the second “counterfeiting by any other name”, and he criticized the third as distortionary because “we don’t have the real cost of money”.
If Lovin’ Crypto Is Wrong, Why Does It Feel so Right?
BitPay’s Sonny Singh told Bloomberg News during the same discussion with Weisenthal that India’s stance toward crypto was little more than sensible caution, and also pointed out that, despite it being banned in China, that country’s contribution to global crypto trading remained substantial.
Just as Argentines are increasingly turning to crypto because their own fiat is failing them, attraction to cryptocurrency can be partially explained by an increasing failure rate of traditional financial models. Bitsonline’s William Peaster recently wrote about Governmental Pain Points as being one driving force behind the emergence–and potential rise in use–of digital currencies.
Regulatory and government pushback, Weisenthal argues, becomes “a validation of the whole point” of cryptocurrency.
Sound off below. Is government pushback against cryptocurrency evidence that it is working the way it should?
Images via Pixabay