Vitalik Buterin draws the attention of the ecosystem with a powerful post on his personal blog in which he expresses his deep concern about the increasing politicization of the crypto sector.
Vitalik Buterin, co-founder of Ethereum, recently expressed on his blog, his concern about the growing politicization in the cryptocurrency sector. In particular, Buterin argues against the trend of choosing political alliances based on who is “pro-crypto.”
In recent years, “crypto” has become an increasingly prominent topic in politics, with different jurisdictions considering bills that regulate blockchain players in various ways. This includes the Markets in Crypto Assets (MiCA) regulation in the EU, efforts to regulate stablecoins in the UK, and the complex mix of legislation and regulation attempted by the SEC in the United States.
Although many of these laws are, in their opinion, reasonable, there are fears that governments will try extreme measures, such as treating almost all currencies as securities or banning self-hosted wallets. Amid these fears, there is a growing push within the crypto space to become more politically active and favor political parties and candidates almost exclusively based on whether they are willing to be lenient and “crypto” friendly.
The true meaning of “Crypto”
“Crypto” does not just refer to cryptocurrencies and blockchains. Within the crypto space, there is often a tendency to overfocus on the centrality of “money”, and the freedom to hold and spend money (or, if you prefer, “tokens”) as the most important political issue.
However, Buterin argues that a near-exclusive focus on cryptocurrencies and blockchains is harder to defend and, more importantly, was not the ideology that originally created crypto in the first place.. What originally created crypto was cyberpunk movement, a much broader techno-libertarian ethos that advocated free and open technology as a way to protect and enhance individual freedoms generally.
In the 2000s, the main issue was fighting against restrictive copyright legislation that was being pushed by corporate lobbying organizations. The main weapons in the fight were torrent networks, encryption and anonymity on the Internet. Faced with all this, Bitcoin was seen as an extension of that spirit to the area of Internet payments.
The risk of politicization
Given this, Buterin argues that choosing political alliances based on who is “pro-crypto” carries a high risk of going against the values that brought you to the crypto space in the first place.
If a politician is in favor of your freedom to trade coins, but has said nothing about other issues related to freedom and technology, then the underlying thought process that leads them to support freedom to trade coins is very different. to Buterin's (and possibly yours). This carries a high risk that they will probably have different conclusions than you about the issues that will matter to you in the future.
The meaning of “pro-crypto” for authoritarians
In the world of cryptocurrencies, the “pro-crypto” label can have various interpretations depending on who uses it. In the case of authoritarian governments, Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin warns against a particularly dangerous interpretation.
Buterin highlights modern Russia as the most prominent example of this phenomenon. According to him, the Russian government's policy regarding cryptocurrencies is quite simple and is divided into two main aspects.
Well if we use it
The first aspect refers to how the government uses cryptocurrencies for its own purposes. In this case, cryptocurrencies are seen as a useful tool to circumvent restrictions imposed by other countries or entities.
This may include evading international sanctions, carrying out financial transactions that would otherwise be difficult due to banking restrictions, or even financing activities they wish to keep out of sight of international scrutiny. In short, when the government uses crypto, it considers it beneficial because it helps avoid limitations imposed by others.
Bad, if you use it
The second aspect refers to how the government views the use of cryptocurrencies by its citizens. In this case, the perspective is very different. Authoritarian governments, which often seek to maintain tight control over the activities of their citizens, view cryptocurrencies as a potential threat.
This is because cryptocurrencies can provide individuals with a degree of financial freedom and anonymity that is difficult to achieve with traditional forms of money. As a result, citizens' use of crypto is seen as negative, as it hinders the government's ability to impose restrictions, conduct surveillance, or in some cases even imprison people for their financial activities.
Fighting duality
This duality in attitude toward cryptocurrencies is a reflection of a broader characteristic of authoritarian governments: the tendency to favor tools and technologies that increase their own power, while opposing those that could empower their citizens.
Therefore, it is crucial that those in the crypto space are aware of these dynamics and not be fooled by claims of being “pro-crypto” without considering who is making them and for what purpose. As Buterin argues, the true value of cryptocurrencies lies in their ability to promote individual freedom and autonomy, not in their ability to be exploited by authoritarian governments for their own purposes.
Buterin concludes that if you're the type of person who's willing to read this article beyond the first paragraph, you're not in crypto just because it's crypto, you're in crypto for deeper underlying goals. Thus, Buterin clarifies that:
Don't align yourself with crypto-as-cryptocurrency, align yourself with those underlying goals and the full set of political implications that come with them.
In short, increasing politicization in the crypto sector is a real concern that requires careful consideration by those in the space. It is essential to remember the underlying values and goals that brought us to cryptocurrency in the first place, and not allow politics to distort or undermine those principles.
