Yes, I know, you are here to let the hate flow.
He bought all the speeches. Donald Trump loves crypto. Embrace DeFi. He has his shoes, and coins. He’s going to fire Gary! Like Polymarket in October, you think Trump is boo-llish.
Unfortunately, he bought a lot of the other kind of bull.
To explain this, we have to understand what the Crypto 4 Trump initiative really is – and that is a coalition of major US-based mining companies and exchanges that have come together to spend aggressively to end their mismanagement.
They are tired of being sued and harassed, and otherwise kicked out of America. And, they have every reason to be.
But alas, the Bitcoin industry does not exist. This was the same argument made to justify the Fork Wars, and let’s just say to sum it up, that this ended badly. If US miners are forced elsewhere, mining will continue elsewhere, and distributing the hashrate, as we saw in the case of the mining ban in China, is very easy: Good for Bitcoin™.
Indeed, ASIC production may always be concentrated in a few multinational firms. Maybe it will take a long time to rebuild. But other countries will take advantage, and the Bitcoin network will continue. Bitcoin could be our best chance to topple all the superpowers out there, and empower the developing world. If that means leaving the US behind, so be it.
Now let’s talk to the donkey in the room. A Kamala presidency will mean more enforcement of US security laws, not a referendum that allows millions of alts to proliferate.
Trump’s victory almost guarantees only one outcome for our industry, and that is that the SEC is tainted, and that means that “coins beyond Bitcoin” will get a “level playing field.”
On the contrary, the continued application of the SEC’s securities laws to the industry will make clear the difference between Bitcoin, which is distributed through proof of work (the only known way to avoid the sale of securities), and all the many intermediate forms.
Simply put: It’s “crypto assets” that need a regulatory framework to survive, not Bitcoin, which is decentralized enough.
Forcing crypto industry developers to comply with these rules will undoubtedly benefit developers who want to extend these capabilities to Bitcoin, the only major crypto with clear rules. Are we actually going to argue that encouraging millions of developers to put their technology on Bitcoin (as opposed to Ethereum or Solana) would be a bad thing?
If there is a common thread in Bitcoin maximalism, it is the assertion that everything outside of Bitcoin is 1) a scam or 2) can be built on top of its blockchain. The continued depreciation of crypto will pressure the market to properly investigate the second point.
Undoubtedly, it will also boost Microstrategy’s stock, MSTR, as it will remain one of the few widely accessible games to get an official beta on Bitcoin.
Sure, maybe the taxes from your Bitcoin gains will be higher, maybe spending will continue to be penalized. By the way, I thought you were HODLing anyway?
So, remind me, of all the pro-Bitcoin policies considered by the Trump presidency, what do you expect to find, other than a government-sanctioned collapse and the prevention of diffusion in the heart?
If you’re pro-Bitcoin, shouldn’t that mean voting for an option that makes Bitcoin more decentralized, and less dependent on US government policy?
Allow me to re-introduce to Madam President Harris, the choice of Bitcoin.
This article is a Take it. The views expressed are entirely those of the author and do not reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.