BRICS v Bitcoin: Clash of Currencies and the Future of Financial Power - #310
TL;DR - BRICS is building a new financial order, bypassing USD dominance. Can Bitcoin adapt to remain a tool for freedom or risk becoming just another asset?
Personal note…
For the new comers:
I’ve been living a bank-free life since 2020. My views stem from the Austrian school of Economics, my experience with on-boarding hundreds of businesses and people, running my own Bitcoin-powered business, and the work I do through The Bitcoin Bay Foundation.
I’m not suggestion central planning or coersion of the protocol. These suggestions come from the realization of a new global trade network which is bypassing Bitcoin all together.
I wanted to find out why.
Hope you find the following insightful.
Reader,
President Trump is painting a picture Bitcoiners have long awaited:
A Bitcoin Strategic Reserve.
A Bitcoin-backed dollar.
Support for domestic Bitcoin mining.
He’s saying what many want to hear, and plenty are cheering.
For some, the U.S. government’s interest means validation. For others, it signals a price boost. But it’s not black and white - it’s a spectrum. From an Austrian economics view, it raises concerns. To some, it’s troubling.
While everyone’s focused on how high Bitcoin’s price can go, there’s something brewing behind the scenes.
Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa
In the late '90s and early 2000s, the BRIC nations saw rapid economic growth. South Africa joined in 2010, completing the BRICS acronym. Their goal: to balance power and gain more global representation.
BRICS soon grew beyond economics, becoming a broad alliance with geopolitical ambitions.
Building on the G-20 framework, they expanded their focus. Today, BRICS covers politics, culture, security, and infrastructure cooperation.
The Great Financial Crisis (GFC), shook the confidence of the world in the US dollar (USD).
This shake in confidence led world powers towards diversification and alternate reserve currencies.
China's strategy exemplifies this shift.
China's de-dollarizing journey
In 2006, China started reducing its US Treasury holdings. Russia followed suit, driven by economic struggles and geopolitical tensions.
By 2014, China, through the Belt and Road Initiative, pushed for local currencies in trade. In 2015, it began adding gold to its foreign reserves—something it hadn’t done since 2009. This marked a shift from dollar-denominated assets. In 2016, China introduced the Renminbi into the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights (SDR) basket. It was offering an alternative to the USD in global trade.
US-China trade tensions escalated. Heavy tariffs on Chinese goods sped up China’s efforts to move away from the USD.
Russia's path to de-dollarizing
Before the Crimea annexation and sanctions, Russia was looking to diversify its reserves. These early efforts highlighted a broader trend. One that accelerates when global powers weaponize their currency.
This shift came in the wake of the Russian bond collapse in the late 90s. It revealed the risk of being too heavily invested in a single currency.
In 2014, Russia ramped up its gold reserves.
By 2015, it launched Mir, an alternative to Visa and MasterCard.
In 2017, Russia pushed for using national currencies in international trade.
Weaponizing the USD
In 2022, amid the war in Ukraine, the US sanctioned Russia. Russia was cut off from SWIFT, and the assets of its nationals were seized or frozen. In response, Russia signed a pact with China and India to develop a new payment system outside Western control. A system promoting local currencies in global trade.
One thing became clear: the USD is now a political weapon.
As BRICS recognized the risks, more countries began aligning with the bloc. The world is now searching for financial alternatives.
The world's response
As momentum builds for BRICS, Bitcoiners cheer for price pumps in USD. But they're missing the bigger picture.
As of writing, over 159 countries—from advanced to developing nations—want to join BRICS.
But while the Number Go Up crowd (NGUC) cheers for price pumps in USD, the world is looking for an alternative.
The signal within the noise is clear.
BTC vs BRICS
This brings us to a critical comparison. Two systems with entirely different philosophies at their core.
The NGUC mocks BRICS. They questions its validity. They ridicules the idea of an alternate currency for global trade and commerce. Few—if any—have bothered to keep up with BRICS developments, and it shows.
Let's take a look at the two systems...
Bitcoin
Decentralized ledger.
Permission-less.
Limited supply.
Immutable.
"Backed by math."
BRICS
Semi-Centralized.
Permissioned.
Questionable supply.
Mutable.
"Backed by politics.” Gold backing is also on the table.
The clear and obvious choice should be Bitcoin. Right?
Bitcoin's struggles
Bitcoiners see it as "perfect money." But flaws—like centralization risks and usability challenges—undermine its promise.
Small blocks have led to centralization.
Due to the nature of SegWit, individuals need to run full nodes. But outside of having a copy of the full ledger, there's no incentive to do so.
Small blocks have also created an artificial production quota to keep miners incentivized. But this congestion leads to unpredictable fees, confirmations, and transaction times.
This has led more and more individuals to look for alternatives.
Lightning Network (LN) Complexity
The Lightning Network (LN) creates a poor user experience for many users. To run a successful LN node, users need to run a full node. As stated, the incentive to do so isn't there. This leads many users—and new users—to opt for convenient, but risky, solutions.
Bitcoin and the Risks of Custodial Solutions
Custodial solutions centralize Bitcoin by handing control to a few institutions, undermining its decentralized ethos. And the more it integrates with the traditional financial systems, the more control over it is demanded.
The trend worsens as Bitcoin’s user experience stays complex. Especially with the Lightning Network requiring full nodes. The more users rely on custodial services, the more Bitcoin starts to resemble the very financial systems it aimed to disrupt.
This reveals a key challenge: balancing innovation with usability.
Mining Centralization
Bitcoin mining is dominated by a few specialized firms using powerful ASICs, undermining the original vision of decentralization.
These companies raise money to cover energy costs and lobby for government deals. Mining becomes centralized.
Individual miners join pools to share costs and rewards. But as mining gets harder, small pools disappear. Big pools take over.
The result: mining centralizes, repeating the problems Bitcoin was meant to solve.
Micro Adoption
Bitcoin adoption exists in pockets, but widespread use remains out of reach.
Early on, the goal was mass adoption. But no one asked: What does that really look like?
To me, it meant global acceptance. Individuals, businesses, and governments using Bitcoin. Prices listed in Bitcoin—milk at the market, flights at the airport, doctor visits, all payable in Bitcoin. Merchants offering both fiat and Bitcoin options. Bitcoin used everywhere, online and offline, at home and abroad.
We see small-scale efforts, like Bitcoin Lake. But what about Bitcoin Boston? Or Bosnia?
HODL culture, pushed by influencers like Saylor, replaced real adoption with speculation, benefiting early adopters but slowing real-world use.
Only 0.4% of the world holds Bitcoin, according to on-chain data. Even El Salvador’s adoption feels incomplete due to its top-down approach.
Meanwhile, Wall Street is embracing Bitcoin. Grassroots adoption struggles, but new ecosystems like Nostr hint at Bitcoin’s potential beyond finance.
Nostr Economy (Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relay)
Nostr is a new protocol for social media, functioning like the Lightning Network. It enables peer-to-peer communication without relying on centralized platforms. This makes it censorship-resistant and open to anyone.
Small marketplaces are beginning to emerge within the Nostr ecosystem. But it’s still early days.
In the grand scheme of things, Nostr remains a nanoparticle in the macro world. It has potential, but with limited reach for now.
BRICS battles
Different countries and cultures will not be frictionless. This is the nature of multinationals trying to work together. BRICS tries to promote the use of local and national currencies. To bring some strength, BRICS looks to back its basket with gold. Two percent of the globe, including central banks, own gold. Combined, BRICS owns a little over 20% of the global suppy.
Some experts thing a gold-backed asset is questionable. What's interesting to me is that many of the BRICS nations have heavy gold mining operations.
Enter blockchain.
Since the birth of Bitcoin, skeptics have shown fascination with blockchain tech.
Imagine tokenizing the currency and gold reserve basket. Then issuing tokens to members based on contribution. The ledger, at the national level, is open and distributed like Bitcoin. Well, it’s happening.
“But what about the gold? Who will hold the gold?”
Last reported, BRICS members agreed to hold their own gold within their borders. If so, and audits are done at the start of tokenization, nations can hold gold in a sovereign way. Not only does this make the BRICS blockchain transparent, but also decentralized. Like a version of eGold on steroids.
From the outset, BRICS is laser-focused on trade and building a parallel economy.
The Focus
Both Bitcoin and BRICS face parallel struggles. Bitcoin between speculation and usability, BRICS between commerce and code.
Bitcoin: Fiat Focused
In contrast, BRICS aims to be a parallel economy that meets global trade needs.
A hammer can build as a tool or destroy as a weapon. Its use attributes are psychological. Bitcoin, the tool, can be money. Today's consensus views Bitcoin as a financial asset. Its utility doesn't derive from use in commerce but from hopes of higher prices. Speculation of value more than a store of value.
Peer-to-peer markets are few and far between. I've yet to see markets where goods and services trade in Bitcoin like the markets of Monerica or BitGree. KYCnot.me is a good swapping service, but I can't exactly hire a mechanic and pay him in Bitcoin.
The only group that I know doing so is The Bitcoin Bay Foundation. I know this because I help with it.
As stated earlier, this sentiment hinders the adoption process. Early adopters reap the benefits of latecomers. Latecomers hope to become the next wave of early adopters when new capital enters. A Ponzi structure. And until this cycle breaks, true adoption of Bitcoin as currency will disappear.
The NGUC believe Bitcoin to be supernatural—a being all its own. Unwavering faith in the code. And that is Bitcoin's death knell.
BRICS: Trade Focused
BRICS is building a parallel economy, based on real-world demand, outside Western influences. This parallel system operates with its own version of SWIFT and banking infrastructure. BRICS started with the idea of trade and commerce. BRICS needs a monetary system.
These nations have individual preferences and policies for trade. The protocol behind BRICS supports that infrastructure.
Examples…
New Development Bank (NDB), 2014. The NDB aims to promote development and infrastructure projects in BRICS countries. This initiative demonstrates BRICS' commitment to cooperation in global trade and economic development.
BRICS Business Council. This group aims to promote trade and investment among member countries. The council identifies areas for cooperation, including infrastructure development, energy, and agriculture.
BRICS Payment System (BPS), 2019. A platform designed to facilitate cross-border payments and trade among member countries. The BPS aims to reduce dependence on the US dollar and promote the use of national currencies. Current plans for BPS include a gold-backed stablecoin. The agreement allows member nations to hold their gold within their borders.
BRICS Trade and Investment Facilitation Plan. This plan aims to simplify customs procedures, reduce trade barriers, and promote investment.
The differences
"Code over commerce" vs. "Commerce over code."
Mathematics vs. human action. One emphasizes the codebase while the other focuses on the human race.
Where the Bitcoin community suffers is its lack of awareness of human action.
BRICS, on the flip side, focuses on real-world needs and trade dynamics.
The NGUC chant, "Bitcoin doesn't care." While true—Bitcoin, the object, like a hammer, doesn't care—its users do. The mindshare of programmers, computer scientists, and intellectuals is huge. It’s surprising that this one aspect—human action—gets overlooked.
Could it be a simple oversight on the part of ego? Are these influencers as credible as they claim to be? Is there something more nefarious behind it all? Who knows... Point being, the Bitcoin community—NGUC more so—has missed the mark.
The New Bitcoin-Dollar
The saying goes that "fiat is backed by nothing." False. Fiat's backing is—or was—oil and violence. Back in the 1960s, Henry Kissinger, under the Nixon administration, struck a deal with the King of Saudi Arabia: "Sell your oil in our currency, we'll provide protection."
Since that time, oil sales have been in USD.
In 2023, Saudi Arabia started trading oil for other currencies—the Chinese Yuan as a starter. BRICS sees the writing on the wall for the USD. So does Saudi Arabia, among other countries.
The world is fast-tracking out of the USD. What’ll take its place? What can save the USD? Is it Bitcoin?
Gold to Petrol to Bitcoin
Understanding the historical evolution of monetary systems offers insights into Bitcoin's potential role.
Pre-1971
The US dollar was gold-backed. Your dollar bill acted as a claim check for gold (or silver) ounces.
The USG overspent on losing wars. Other nations caught wind. These nations then started reclaiming their gold. Before things got out of hand, the USG cut the gold tie, creating fiat currency.
But a currency note backed by "faith and credit" isn't reassuring enough. What worked before was a currency note backed by an asset. The asset was the most desirable thing. The currency note reflected the market's sentiment toward it. Gold had—and still has—many uses in the market. What's going to back this new currency note? It needs to be something as useful as gold.
Post-1971
The USG and Saudi Arabia’s agreement to price oil in USD created the petrodollar. This maintained the USD's dominance in the market and shifted the paradigm.
Energy as the new commodity
The shift hints at a future where Bitcoin, like oil, underpins a new standard.
Growing societies need energy, and in the digital age, demand is rising fast.
Bitcoin mining consumes vast energy. That energy secures both the asset and the network. Mining helps stabilize power grids and uses wasted energy. Bitcoin becomes energy, and like oil, commoditized—leading to a Bitcoin-Dollar standard.
This system would likely involve a complex tango between currency markets, TradFi, and central banks working to keep the USD stable against Bitcoin.
A tool for inflation
With $35.7 trillion in debt and unsustainable interest, hyperinflation seems inevitable, as Paul Tudor Jones famously warns, "All roads lead to inflation."
Advocates like Dennis Porter lobby for the USG to adopt a Bitcoin Reserve Strategy (BSR). The idea as it stands:
Reduce the national debt. The USG would exchange fiat for Bitcoin. As the price appreciates, it could sell some of its Bitcoin to pay off the debt, reducing the burden on taxpayers.
Inflation hedge. Bitcoin's limited supply makes it less susceptible to inflation. Not only caused by the USG but also by other central banks globally.
An investment asset. Bitcoin’s potential to appreciate over time provides the USG with profit potential.
Diversify reserves. By investing in Bitcoin, the USG spreads its reserves across different asset classes.
MicroStrategy's "Buy, Borrow, Die" method exemplifies this.
The company leverages debt to buy Bitcoin. As its stock and Bitcoin price rise, it borrows again to buy more Bitcoin—hedging inflation while paying off old debts with new debts. The USG already employs this debt-cycling strategy. With a BSR, it can do so on digital steroids.
By hyperinflating the USD to buy Bitcoin, US citizens still saving USD would see their purchasing power destroyed. On the global stage, it would erode confidence in the USD.
A run on the Bitcoin Bank
In the event of a mass global exodus—from the USD or toward Bitcoin—the network would stretch to its limits. Two immediate outcomes:
Skyrocketing Transaction Fees. Users seeking to self-custody. Businesses dumping dollars. Institutions buying Bitcoin. The demand for block space would drive up transaction costs. Small businesses and individuals—even nations—could find it expensive to transact.
Network Congestion. Such demand would render the network unusable for many. Users could wait days, weeks, or months. This would hamper ordinary business transactions. Devastate the global economy.
The idea of a BSR sounds good on paper, but without proper development, the juice might not be worth the squeeze.
Enforcing the New Standard
Should Bitcoin become a new standard, enforcement comes with heavy political challenges.
Bitcoin becoming a new monetary standard would shake the political landscape—globally.
Bitcoin wouldn't be the only thing backing the BSR. Unprecedented levels of compliance, control, and political violence would be the tools for enforcement.
Despite Bitcoin's decentralization, the State will not relinquish power without rigging the game. To illustrate the tools of enforcement:
Fines and Sanctions
Governments have long used fines and sanctions to ensure compliance.
Just as the IRS ensures tax collection, heavy fines would await the noncompliant. Bitcoiners often claim "unconfiscatable," but in practice? Ask Ross Ulbricht, Roger Ver, or any other individual how that worked out. The USG already seizes digital assets through legal coercion—even Bitcoin.
Capital Controls
Restricting the free movement of Bitcoin or the ability to convert to fiat is another effective measure. We've seen it happen over the last four years. Financial sanctions punish non-compliant countries today. Similar actions against individuals and organizations are a possibility.
Asset Seizure and Imprisonment
Without access to private keys, Bitcoin is resistant to seizure. However, history has shown that State violence and coercion are effective.
They might not be able to touch your Bitcoin, but they can detain you or freeze exchange accounts.
If Bitcoin becomes critical to the financial system, political pressures will mount.
Custodial exchanges, Bitcoin miners, and wallet makers—everyone becomes a target for regulatory enforcement.
We've already seen this with exchanges like Coinbase, Crypto.com, and Binance. Bitcoin miner Marathon complies with OFAC regulations to freeze transactions. Wallets like Phoenix shut down operations in the US due to regulatory pressures.
Operation Chokepoint 2.0 bottlenecks the flow of Bitcoin-to-fiat ramps.
Compulsory Participation and Censorship
These risks highlight the paradox of Bitcoin's integration into government-backed systems. The more it aligns, the less decentralized it becomes.
Full transition to a Bitcoin-based system might push mandatory participation.
It’s mandatory for citizens to accept fiat for goods, services, taxes, and debts. The USG could mandate the acceptance of Bitcoin as well. Imagine fines and penalties priced in Bitcoin.
The USG could also censor or blacklist xpubs, addresses, and accounts—just as the SWIFT network disconnects countries from global banking (Russia, for example). And again, citing Marathon and OFAC, Bitcoin is not immune to this. Tornado Cash, a mixer, is still operational, but governments track and trace those coins.
Code might be resistant to censorship. People and businesses are not.
The Political Challenge of a Fixed-Supply
Out-of-control spending governments aren’t ready. Not being able to create new Bitcoin during a financial crisis is out of the question.
Imagine, during extreme economic downturns, governments resorting to extreme austerity. Social unrest would follow. They’ll do anything to confiscate Bitcoin through policy.
Can Individuals Hold Bitcoin Sovereignly?
Under these circumstances, a question about self-custody arises. Can individuals, companies, states, or nations hold Bitcoin in a sovereign way?
We can reference the gold confiscation of the 1930s for insight. Or more recent events—Russia and China trading without the USD amid sanctions.
BRICS is well aware of this.
The more Bitcoin mining, energy, and development centers in the US, the less BRICS wants it.
When the USD Becomes Worthless
The collapse of the USD—once unthinkable—is now not so far-fetched.
Hyperinflation and de-dollarization trends, led by BRICS, are accelerating. Russia and China are paving the way. The Federal Reserve and USG, through currency creation, are helping.
The Gold Bugs, and OG Bitcoiners, were right.
The Weimar Republic’s hyperinflation offers a chilling parallel.
In the 1920s, the Weimar Republic printed currency relentlessly to pay reparations. This led to hyperinflation. Prices skyrocketed. Citizens lost faith in the currency. Those who saved in it were wiped out. Social unrest followed.
The USG's debt is similar. Exceeding trillions, it has grown to unmanageable levels. When it breaks, so will confidence. The only way out is hyperinflation.
Maybe we're already there.
Bitcoiners cheering for a Bitcoin-backed dollar must recognize the risks associated with collapse. Surely...
The past offers a cautionary tale, as seen with the hyperinflation of the Weimar Republic.
Can Bitcoin Replace the Dollar?
Imagine repricing goods and services in Bitcoin. Governments, local and state, restructuring contracts, wages, and taxes to Bitcoin-denominated transactions.
What would happen to fiat prices during the transition? These practical questions expose the complexities of shifting from fiat to Bitcoin as a global standard.
Imagine extreme volatility as people adjust to pricing things in satoshis.
Moreover, would Bitcoin, as it stands now, fix things? With limited block space, unreliable transaction fees, congestion issues, and centralizing services... Could Bitcoin handle global demand?
Without careful planning or protocol improvements, Bitcoin might not be the fix-all solution.
Social and Economic Ramifications at Home and Abroad
The collapse would devastate the US economy. Imports could become prohibitively expensive. Global supply chains could grind to a halt. Americans would face rapid declines in living standards. Social unrest. Political instability. Unemployment. All of it would likely follow, forcing the USG to restructure everything.
This would have ripple effects abroad. Nations with large US debt holdings would face massive losses. Defaults would be triggered. All the while, BRICS and its parallel system would dominate global trade.
Bitcoiners need to recognize the magnitude of these shifts.
Bitcoin doesn't operate in a vacuum.
Building a Bitcoin-based economy smoothly will take a lot of work.
Realizing a De-dollarized World
It’s been happening for decades, with more recent efforts from BRICS.
De-dollarization—reducing USD exposure in trade and finance—is a central theme globally.
But if we want to see a Bitcoin-backed future, we need to understand the geopolitical side of things. Like why BRICS is hesitant about Bitcoin’s potential as a reserve asset.
De-dollarization Efforts Led by BRICS
The BRICS '24 Summit concluded this past week. 159 out of 195 recognized nations are joining the BRICS payment system.
They all recognize the need for better trade agreements and financial systems. With the USD weaponized, many nations are seeking alternatives.
Key actions by BRICS reflect a determined effort to build a parallel economy:
Russia, China, and India conduct most of their trade in local currencies.
BRICS members now hold over 20% of the global gold supply within their borders.
The BRICS Payment System is set to rival SWIFT. With plans for a gold-backed digital currency to support trade.
BRICS has facilitated direct trade among grain producers, reducing dependency on the USD.
Imagining a Post-USD World
A world without the USD as the global reserve currency would look very different.
Imagine a multi-currency world backed by gold, commodities, and a basket of local fiat currencies. It could dominate the global landscape. Such a shift would reshape global relationships and force individuals and institutions to rethink their financial strategies.
For Americans, a de-dollarized world could bring:
Higher import prices
Lower purchasing power
Rising inflation
Abroad, countries would gain greater economic freedom. They wouldn't have to worry about US sanctions or its monetary policies.
Again, the transition wouldn't be smooth.
There would be significant restructuring of global debt and trade agreements. US-denominated debt restructuring would cause global disruption.
How Will Bitcoin Fit into the New Reality?
Why BRICS is Hesitant About Bitcoin as a Global Reserve
Mark Goodwin's work, "The Bitcoin-Dollar," and Whitney Webbs, “One Nation Under Blackmail,” explains the complexities between Bitcoin and institutional involvement. It's a solid read, and I encourage you to take the time to check it out.
From my own reading, combined with observations of BRICS, it’s not hard to see why BRICS is hesitant.
The USG’s Deep Connections with Bitcoin-Related Infrastructure
Bitcoin’s infrastructure—closely tied to Wall Street—creates distrust among BRICS members.
Stablecoins as instruments of control
PayPal, Circle, and Tether are leading the development of USD stablecoins. These coins digitize the USD. While some view stablecoins as on-ramps, BRICS sees them as tools to extend US hegemony.
BlackRock and Treasury involvement
BlackRock's Bitcoin ETF further integrates Bitcoin into the traditional financial system. For BRICS nations, Bitcoin seems co-opted by the US financial elite - centralized by Wall Street rather than neutral, decentralized money.
Like what you’re reading? Send a signal.
USG's BRS
Advocates lobby for a BSR to help the USG hedge against inflation and stabilize the USD. This reinforces BRICS' belief that Bitcoin is not a neutral asset but an extension of US influence.
From the BRICS perspective
If significant portions of Bitcoin's infrastructure and liquidity reside in the US, Bitcoin is too much of a risk. It becomes a tool of the USG’s dominance - a digital extension of the existing petrodollar system.
On Sovereignty
Sovereignty means having the power to govern yourself. It applies to individuals, states, and nations.
Nation. Controlling borders and acting independently, like the US separate from the UK.
State. Making and enforcing laws without outside interference, like states acting apart from federal control.
Individual. Personal freedom to make your own choices without state control.
These levels overlap but often conflict. Individuals want freedom. States push back on federal power. Nations defend their authority. The challenge is balancing these forces.
"That government is best which governs least" - Henry David Thoreau
A true sovereign nation or state protects the sovereignty of the individual. Without free people, there is no free state.
Price vs. Value
People often confuse price with value, especially in Bitcoin.
Price. What you pay. It changes with supply, demand, speculation, and market sentiment.
Value. The real worth of something based on its usefulness.
Bitcoin’s value comes from decentralization, censorship resistance, and peer-to-peer transactions without middlemen.
Focusing too much on price hides this value. For Bitcoin to succeed, it must compete—not just with other cryptocurrencies, but with fiat. It must outperform banks, not mimic them.
On State Paternalism
The idea speaks to a market distorted by government intervention.
Bitcoiners rallying for institutional adoption fail to change the status quo.
Cheering for institutional adoption is perpetuating the status quo. Whether it be ETFs or state-backed incentives, the ones with deep pockets make out.
The Actor Most Sensitive to Price Fluctuations: The "Marginal Buyer"
The "marginal buyer" shapes markets. Here, institutions become the marginal buyer through ETFs and sovereign wealth funds. This transforms Bitcoin from a tool for liberty into a state-controlled financial asset.
This shift in the marginal buyer reflects how the market depends on big money and government approval.
Institutional adoption risks undermining Bitcoin’s ethos, favoring regulation over freedom.
Bitcoiners need to remain critical of institutional involvement.
The real ethos lies in building parallel systems. Systems that don’t rely on the state or institutions for approval to function.
Why Bitcoin, as it is Now, Doesn’t Fix This
Right now, Bitcoin isn't solving the macroeconomic problems many believe it will.
The NGU fixation perpetuates the same system Bitcoin set out to disrupt—USD hegemony. This raises a fundamental question: Can Bitcoin achieve its promise of financial freedom?
ETFs, institutions, and even nations adopting Bitcoin under their own terms distort Bitcoin's mission. They buy obscene amounts of Bitcoin using their printing and lobbying power. Through access to capital markets—unavailable to the average individual—they manipulate markets. As an indirect consequence, they manipulate the narrative as well.
"But Bitcoin is for anyone, even enemies!"
Yes. But do you know your opponent as well as they know you?
Two Factions in the Bitcoin Community: Cypherpunks vs. HODL Maxis
Cypherpunks emphasize privacy, decentralization, and financial independence. HODL Maxis, on the other hand, advocate for Bitcoin as a store of value for long-term fiat gain.
This clash highlights growing tension: Sovereignty or speculation? Freedom or fiat?
Until the focus shifts back to usability, Bitcoin won't fulfill its potential.
Why BRICS over Bitcoin
Distrust of US-Dominated Infrastructure
As mentioned earlier, the infrastructure surrounding Bitcoin - despite its decentralized nature - is closely tied to US interests. Exchanges, mining operations, and institutional players are predominantly based in the US.
Only 0.4% of the global population owns cryptocurrency, and 0.2% own Bitcoin.
Much of that is concentrated among early adopters, corporations, and institutions—most of whom are US-based. This raises concerns about whether Bitcoin can serve as a neutral asset for the world. BRICS offers an alternative.
Where We Go From Here
As the world moves towards de-dollarization, Bitcoiners need to face hard truths. Bitcoin, as it is now, might not be enough.
Here’s three identifiable options:
Option A: Do Nothing—Trust the Status Quo
Bitcoin is perfect as is. No changes needed. No updates necessary. Bitcoin, now, is a finished product - digital gold.
NGUC can continue to cheer ETFs and government adoption. Celebrate the price pumps. Hope the financial institutions allow them to cash out.
This approach relies on the very system Bitcoin was created to circumvent.
The price might grow, but at a cost.
Bitcoiners may one day face a choice: accept government control of Bitcoin or lose their wealth.
This option offers short-term comfort but leaves Bitcoin’s fate in the hands of institutions—the very institutions Bitcoiners set out to escape.
Option B: Build Parallel Economies
Embrace Bitcoin’s revolutionary roots.
This means accepting Bitcoin's flaws—not to abandon it, but to improve it.
Build systems that bypass traditional fiat rails. Create local, parallel economies where Bitcoin can thrive independently.
This means:
Improving Bitcoin’s privacy at the base layer. Ensure users can transact freely without fear of censorship or surveillance.
Building a better user experience. Rival that of banks and other cryptocurrencies. Bitcoin must compete globally. Frictionless and intuitive payments are essential—not just on technical second layers but at the base layer.
Encouraging real peer-to-peer adoption. Move beyond speculation. Bitcoin must become useful as money.
Educating communities. Focus on trade and commerce, not just technical jargon and code. Educate people at the human level.
This path is harder. It demands effort, innovation, and collaboration. But it aligns with Bitcoin’s original ethos.
Without this effort, Bitcoin becomes neutered, not disruptive.
Option C: Accept Fate—Look Beyond Bitcoin
If Bitcoin can't evolve, the third option is to accept its limitations. The dream of financial sovereignty won't be realized with Bitcoin alone.
As more institutions and governments gain control over Bitcoin, it might be time to move on. The possibility of Bitcoin becoming co-opted raises hard questions about its future relevance.
Other cryptocurrencies offer better privacy, faster transactions, lower fees, more decentralization, and better user experiences.
This path is difficult to acknowledge. It’s hard to let go. But it means accepting that Bitcoin may not be the ultimate solution.
Either way, the fight for financial liberty must remain anti-fragile.
If Bitcoin can't do it, something else will.
Sovereignty requires adaptability and the willingness to move on if necessary.
It’s a painful realization. But clinging to a flawed system won't create financial sovereignty. Bitcoin may remain part of the solution, but it doesn’t have to be the whole solution.
Conclusion
The world is at a crossroads.
As BRICS builds a parallel economy, Bitcoiners must confront hard truths. Bitcoin, as it stands, might not be enough. It faces challenges from within—centralization, custodial solutions, and speculative behavior.
And from without—as Wall Street and governments co-opt its infrastructure.
The question isn't "when moon?" but whether Bitcoin stays a tool for freedom - or just another asset in the hands of institutions.
The choice is clear.
Build parallel systems that align with Bitcoin’s ethos - or risk losing it to the very forces it sought to escape.
Time is running out.
Will Bitcoiners change with the world—or be left behind?
Rare Passenger / block height 867 776
Support living on Bitcoin
If you’ve found my content helpful or insightful, tips send a signal.
Thankyou for your time and effort on this article. Discomfiting, to say the least, but well overdue. I look forward exploring more of your work. Are you on Nostr?