The approval of nearly a dozen bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) has stirred both celebration and dissent within the cryptocurrency community. While many see this as a significant step forward for the crypto space, a faction of dissenters on social media, particularly on X/Twitter, has raised objections, claiming it compromises the core principles of decentralisation.
Among the critics is self-described researcher “Chris Blec,” who suggests a potential conspiracy by major players like BlackRock to manipulate bitcoin’s core features. OG Bitcoiner Max Keiser goes to the extreme, warning of a scenario where the U.S. government could confiscate bitcoins held by these ETFs.
However, this dissent is being countered with a perspective that sees the approval of bitcoin ETFs as a positive development. The argument revolves around the notion that a bitcoin ETF aligns with the original mission of the cryptocurrency project, as envisioned by the mysterious Satoshi Nakamoto.
Bitcoin, originally designed as peer-to-peer digital cash resistant to intermediaries, takes a new turn with the introduction of ETFs. Advocates argue that these investment vehicles strengthen bitcoin’s case as a store of value, a concept crucial for a currency that aims to empower individuals to be their own bank.
The store of value mechanism involves purchasing bitcoin with excess savings and selling it when needed. In a censorship-resistant and seizure-resistant form, bitcoin becomes a valuable asset for those seeking protection against economic uncertainties. The existence of a bitcoin market, even catering to traditional investors in major capital markets like the U.S., further supports its role as a global financial alternative.
Bitcoin’s core features, including censorship resistance and portability, make it a powerful tool, especially in regions facing authoritarian regimes and capital controls. The ease of holding bitcoin securely, represented by a string of characters, stands in stark contrast to the challenges posed by volatile government policies that often leave individuals “unbanked.”
The introduction of bitcoin ETFs also addresses concerns related to security and liquidity, making it more accessible to a broader audience. With ETFs aligning with existing financial service regulations, they can be held in retirement accounts, simplifying the investment process for average consumers. This, in turn, improves the industry’s reputation by reducing the occurrences of security and liquidity issues faced by individual bitcoin owners.
In essence, bitcoin ETFs are seen as a solution to the “last mile problem” in cryptocurrency adoption. By providing an easy entry point for the marginally interested and crypto-curious consumers, ETFs contribute to the liquidity of the cryptocurrency market. This move towards accessibility is anticipated to broaden the market, attracting not only ideologues and gamblers but also average individuals interested in contributing to bitcoin’s growing influence.
As the crypto community debates the implications of SEC’s decision, it becomes evident that the introduction of bitcoin ETFs is not just a financial development but a step towards financial inclusion, allowing even the non-tech-savvy to participate in this evolving financial experiment.
