If you asked a cypherpunk in the 1990s on their worst scenario for the future of money, they would probably have described something very close to the Central Bank digital currencies (CBDC). The fight against financial surveillance was fundamental for the first Bitcoin instigators, and the CBDCs go against everything they represent: privacy, decentralization and individual sovereignty.
In “The Cypherpunk Manifesto” (1993), Eric Hughes argued that cryptography should protect individual freedoms, not to be a centralized control tool. Bitcoin, born from concerns about financial censorship and systemic instability, represents an alternative to traditional monetary systems. While central banks generally operate with a certain degree of independence of governments, CBDCs raise questions on financial privacy and the increased state surveillance potential on transactions. As such, CBDCs are the antithesis of Bitcoin.
The CBDC, which are adopted and tested worldwide, have been marketed as a tool for financial inclusion. But, for most bitcoins, they are a Trojan horse to strengthen state control rather than granting real financial ownership. They represent the exact type of Big Brother system that Cyplerpunks fought to prevent.
This is why Adam Back – one of the most influential figures of all time in Bitcoin, the inventor of Hashcash, and the founder of Blockstream – expressed the dangers of CBDC and the role of the World Economic Forum (WEF) In promoting the promotion of the promotion of the World Economic Forum (WEF) to promote them. He sees this for what it is: a game of power by the global elites, many of which, be misunderstood – or actively oppose – in Bitcoin. If Bitcoin has been designed to eliminate state control, CBDC are designed to return it.
According to Back, a lecturer of the Hong Kong consensus, CBDCs have not emerged as a natural evolution of money; They were a reactionary decision of regulators – a panic response to the threat of digital currency in the private sector. He underlined the Facebook balance as the moment that freaks out the central banks, when we caught discussions on Google Meets.
“The regulators have seen that a company with a billion users could launch business electronic species, and they realized that they could lose control. They therefore tried to get their own government electronic money,” said declared Back. “But the problem is that the problem is that the problem is, it is systematically impossible for them to create something that the average person would like to use because they have such ideas focused on control.”
Adam Back is a Hong Kong consensus speaker. Come and experience the most influential event in web3 and digital assets, from February 18, 20. Register today and save 15% with the Coindesk15 code.
The return not only criticizes CBDC in theory; It actively builds an alternative. During the past year, Blockstream has launched the Jade Plus hardware portfolio – a hardware portfolio only designed for users concerned for confidentiality, offering an open source alternative to the big book and Trezor – and Greenlight, a non -gastronomic lightning That AS-A-Service platform that simplifies Bitcoin payments for developers.
Blockstream has also widened the Bitcoin financial infrastructure with new institutional quality investment funds, offering regulated Bitcoin -based financial products for high -level investors. They also advance the layout solutions These initiatives are based on the longtime satellite network of Blockstream, which allows Bitcoin transactions without internet access, and its mining operations, which strengthens decentralization.
Together, they reflect a clear vision: a financial system based on Bitcoin independent of traditional banks and centralized authorities.
Some might say that state participation in Bitcoin is an increasing concern. With the FNB Bitcoin who gain ground, discussions around a strategic reserve of American bitcoin and institutions storing assets, is there not a risk that governments and large entities will take centralized control On Bitcoin? Aren’t individual self-sufficiency and self-care the question?
Back, a 54 -year -old British cryptographer, who speaks with a silent humility that denies his influence, remains non -Bothered. Hydrate. Happy. In his way. Concentrate. Flourishing.
“FNB and other investment products built around Bitcoin simply give people a simpler way to start,” he said, with the cool resolution of a mission man.
“I hope they take physical bitcoin later and learn to store it. What matters is that a good number of people hold Bitcoin in its electronic cash format of carriers, so it does not become Too concentrated in ETFs or institutions, and it is still the business today – the majority is in individual property, some in cold storage, some in exchanges and things like that.
Although it is difficult to predict exactly how the balance between self-cire and institutional assets will change over time, the back believes that the broader trend is clear.
He was involved in Bitcoin long enough to see how the adoption takes place. His well -documented email exchanges with Satoshi Nakamoto suggest that he could better understand the trajectory of Bitcoin than anyone. The way he sees it, the top of the bitcoin funnel has widened. Of course, the FNB and the institutional funds put bitcoin in the dominant current, but in the end, it simply means that more people will be attracted to the Bitcoin network. Basically, Bitcoin remains opt-in, resistant to censorship and exempt from government interference. CBDCs are exactly the opposite.
Currently, 44 countries are at the CBDC pilot stadium, according to a Tracker from the Atlantic Council. Some claim to preserve privacy, but the reality is that they are poorly veiled efforts to maintain centralized power on money. For a certain time, the push of digital currencies supported by the state seemed inevitable – until the political opposition in the United States has transformed a battlefield problem. Reflecting the net republican turn against CBDC in the past 18 months, Trump recently announced that he would prohibit CBDC development in the United States
The back emphasizes it as a sign that the tide moves in favor of Bitcoin. “A certain number of people in Trump’s office are Bitcoin entries with a relevant experience, so we may see an improvement because it is partly participants to date who would probably have preferred Bitcoin did not exist Not, “he said.
He referred to the former President of the SEC, Gary Gensler, who, despite his MIT teacher blockchain, took an aggressive position against the industry. “Hopefully there will be more common sense and future regulations and the recognition of individual rights at the self-subsist,” said Back.
Financial monitoring
For return, he does not want Bitcoin to win, he wants the CBDC to die. And he thinks that CBDCs are not only a monetary problem – they are part of a broader program of financial surveillance, social credit systems and state control. “Interference of social media in the elections in the United States and the expression of interest for CBDC in Europe where they are clearly envious of Chinese social credit scores and things like that which are very dystopical, some of the things that the WEF has published. .
The WEF, in particular, directed the load on CBDC and other centralized control mechanisms. “I mean, they have generally been in favor of all kinds of illiberal things like CBDC and the loss of individual men in power. I mean, they will go out with test balloons that seem horrible and will then remove their own tweets. “
He is not wrong. The WEF has a story of floating controversial ideas and rubs them when the backlash strikes. For example, in 2021, they tweeted that the pandemic “calmly improved cities” by reducing air pollution. The suggestion that locks were a net positive for the environment were scandalized, so WEF removed the tweet.
Blockstream bet that individuals and high institutions would not want their assets to be trapped in a CBDC system endorsed by the WEF controlled by centralized entities. This is why they launched a series of Bitcoin funds of institutional quality designed for those who seek to preserve their wealth in a system that cannot be arbitrarily manipulated. Recent events have only strengthened why it counts so much. The collapse of FTX, Celsius and other cryptographic societies in 2022, still eroded confidence in centralized institutions, whether in traditional finance or crypto.
Back, however, has nothing to do with Sam Bankman Frit, the founder of FTX Disgrace who cared little about privacy and was proudly anti-decentralization. He also has no such as Alex Mashinsky, the CEO of Celsius who has recklessly played with user funds. Back is a cypherpunk who continues to perform on the master plan to ensure that Bitcoin is deployed exactly as provided for Satoshi: as a decentralized monetary network, without confidence and resistant to censorship.
For him, it’s more than just battle between Bitcoin and CBDC. It is a question of freedom. “It is a renaissance for Cypherpunk thought,” said return, explaining that once people are attracted to bitcoin, they begin to grasp its deeper implications, and they see what it means for Privacy, sovereignty and control. He added that when the Cyplerpunk origin manifesto was written in the 1990s, its authors may not fully anticipate the depth of digital technology, possibly impregnating all aspects of our life.
“So in a way, the [Manifesto’s] The concerns are even more pressing now because everything is online, “he said, the laser eyes sparkled.
