Opinion: Politicians such as Sen. Warren compelled to despise Bitcoin due to its decentralized nature
Disclaimer: The author’s views and opinions expressed in this article are solely their own and do not reflect the views and opinions of crypto.news’ editorial team.
Vivek Ramaswamy, a US presidential candidate, recently discussed Senator Elizabeth Warren’s stance on Bitcoin during an interview on the WhatBitcoinDid podcast. Ramaswamy believes that Warren’s opposition to Bitcoin stems from her belief in the supremacy of the state over the individual. He argues that individuals should have the power to hold their own Bitcoin and create a government that is accountable to them.
Ramaswamy points out that politicians like Warren are aware of what Bitcoin represents, and it is this understanding that triggers their negative reaction to it. He plans to bring up the topic of Bitcoin in the upcoming Republican Presidential debates.
Warren’s desire to limit individuals’ ability to hold their own Bitcoin stems from her belief in protecting the state and its fiat currency system. Ramaswamy argues that this system ultimately empowers nations to engage in endless wars, as the people end up paying for these wars through inflation, rather than direct taxes.
In the digital age, centralized currencies pose a threat to individuals. Ramaswamy highlights the example of the trucker strike in Ottawa, where the Canadian government used surveillance techniques to identify protestors and punish them by closing their bank accounts without any charges being filed. This demonstrates the power that politicians like Warren wish to preserve.
Furthermore, Ramaswamy warns that the world is moving towards central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), which would give governments ultimate control over their citizens’ lives. CBDCs could be used as instruments of power and control, enabling governments to abolish cash and have complete authority over their citizens.
He cites China as an example, where individuals can be excluded from the financial system based on their social credit score. The government can restrict their spending abilities and limit their access to certain services based on their compliance with government rules. Ramaswamy suggests that other nations, such as the BRICS countries, may also seek to implement similar systems, which could undermine the dominance of the US dollar.
To modernize the US dollar without introducing a digital dollar, Ramaswamy proposes that the Federal Reserve should establish a more predictable and transparent monetary policy. He suggests issuing treasury bills backed by hard currencies, including Bitcoin, to discipline the Federal Reserve and provide consumers with access to assets tied to hard currency.
Ramaswamy emphasizes the importance of fighting for the right to self-custody Bitcoin, as it can be a core technology in the reindustrialization of the West. He believes that Bitcoin should not be undermined by politicians like Warren, but rather embraced as a tool for innovation and economic growth.
In conclusion, Ramaswamy’s comments shed light on the concerns surrounding Warren’s stance on Bitcoin and the potential impact of centralized digital currencies on individual freedom and economic stability.
