> There is certainly the open question of whether China will surpass the US military and become a world reserve currency based on the draw of military might alone. But that doesn't have anything to do with decentralization, rather just a different centralizer.
You're right, but it does have something to do. The US dollar is the best weapon the USA have at the moment, far more efficient than all the nukes. When the US dollar will be treated equal to the Euro or the Yuan or the Yen, the USA won't have an edge anymore and... will have nothing to lose anymore.
That's when possibly we will see a mass adoption of cryptocurrencies where powerful countries will search to dominate mining, innovation, etc. As long as we have a single country policing the world, adoption will be incredibly slow and mass adoption will not happen unless we have some visionary politicians ...
> framing it as a political question of whether the Republicans might "embrace change" (ie overtly facilitate the US's decline) seems like a terribly self-destructive paradigm.
US dollar is declining, and that will continue, it's not an "if". Suing every crypto company is not going to help either way on the long term. It's less about "facilitating US decline", than whether politicians can look forward, or will keep looking back. Republicans seem to have a more open minded approach
I agree that USD forms a very powerful (and suffocating) global jurisdiction, but I wouldn't describe it as a weapon (Russia seems to be getting along just fine). It's somewhere between soft and medium power, on countries that have committed to the USD empire.
> That's when possibly we will see a mass adoption of cryptocurrencies where powerful countries will search to dominate mining, innovation, etc.
This is cryptocurrency maximalism. I used to believe in this before Bitcoin was even a thing. Now almost twenty years later, seeing it mostly play out as a vehicle for speculation (most of the popular coins are still non-fungible!), I'm not so sure.
> As long as we have a single country policing the world, adoption will be incredibly slow and mass adoption will not happen unless we have some visionary politicians ...
Visionary of what? It was plausible to handwave this multipolar desire back when other countries weren't starting major wars (so countries could exist independently) and the whole world seemed to be democratizing. Now with openly aggressive Russia plus a looming seemingly-competent China, the demand for US military support, and by extension USD, has drastically increased.
> Republicans seem to have a more open minded approach
Don't confuse entertaining foreign interests as "open mindedness". Republicans are further from the incumbent US power structure, and are thus more willing to sell out to foreign power structures.
You're right, but it does have something to do. The US dollar is the best weapon the USA have at the moment, far more efficient than all the nukes. When the US dollar will be treated equal to the Euro or the Yuan or the Yen, the USA won't have an edge anymore and... will have nothing to lose anymore.
That's when possibly we will see a mass adoption of cryptocurrencies where powerful countries will search to dominate mining, innovation, etc. As long as we have a single country policing the world, adoption will be incredibly slow and mass adoption will not happen unless we have some visionary politicians ...
> framing it as a political question of whether the Republicans might "embrace change" (ie overtly facilitate the US's decline) seems like a terribly self-destructive paradigm.
US dollar is declining, and that will continue, it's not an "if". Suing every crypto company is not going to help either way on the long term. It's less about "facilitating US decline", than whether politicians can look forward, or will keep looking back. Republicans seem to have a more open minded approach