Is it easy to profit in the cryptocurrency world? Vitalik urges not to choose a political stance based on supporting cryptocurrencies.

Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin expressed in his latest article "Against choosing your political allegiances based on who is 'pro-crypto'" that politicians being "pro-crypto" doesn't necessarily mean they will always be friendly to the industry, citing the phenomenon of politicians changing their stance for electoral reasons. He also hopes people will reflect on their original intentions for supporting cryptocurrencies.

Avoid Choosing Your Political Stance Solely Based on Supporting Cryptocurrencies

Regulation Mostly Reasonable, Crypto Space Only Chooses Political Side as "Crypto-Friendly"

Vitalik stated that in recent years, "cryptocurrency" has become an increasingly important topic in political policies, with various jurisdictions considering regulating activities in the blockchain space in various ways. For example, the EU's Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation, the UK's efforts in stablecoin regulation, and the legislative and enforcement attempts by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Many of these bills, he finds, are reasonable, although some are concerned that governments may take extreme measures, such as classifying almost all tokens as securities or banning self-custody wallets. Against this backdrop of fear, the cryptocurrency space is becoming increasingly involved in political activities internally, almost entirely based on whether politicians are tolerant and friendly towards cryptocurrencies.

Vitalik: Risks in Profit-Driven Political Choices

Vitalik expressed, "In this article, I am against this trend, especially as I believe that making decisions in this way poses a high risk of deviating from the values you originally entered the cryptocurrency space with. Cryptocurrencies are not just about cryptocurrencies and blockchain. The cryptocurrency space often places excessive emphasis on the central role of 'money,' believing that the freedom to hold and spend money or tokens is the most important political issue."

The Origin of Cryptocurrency: Cypherpunk

Vitalik takes us back to the origins of cryptocurrency. He stated that the creation of cryptocurrencies was part of a broader tech-libertarian movement - the cypherpunk movement, which advocates for protecting and enhancing individual freedoms through free and open technology.

Back in the 2000s, the main focus was on opposing restrictive copyright legislation pushed by corporate lobbying organizations. The primary weapons at that time were peer-to-peer networks, encryption, and internet anonymity. One crucial lesson learned early on was the importance of decentralization. Satoshi Nakamoto, in one of his rare public political statements, explained, "You won't find a solution to political problems in cryptography. But we can win a major battle in the arms race and gain a new territory of freedom within a few years."

The True Value of Cryptocurrencies

He believes that Bitcoin was seen as an extension of this spirit into the realm of online payments. Bitcoin was a very easy way to pay online, which could be used to organize royalties for artists without relying on restrictive copyright laws. The thinking in this context is that freedom is important, decentralized networks excel in protecting freedom, and money is one important area where these networks can be applied but is just one of many.

Other Aspects of Technological Freedom

He believes that in addition to cryptocurrencies, freedom in communication, digital identity, privacy of thoughts, and other aspects of technological freedom are equally important. These are aspects that are becoming increasingly important in the coming decades as our interactions are increasingly mediated by AI. High-quality information access and helping people form high-quality viewpoints in the face of environmental challenges are also crucial aspects of societal technology. The goals of this technological freedom often spill over into areas beyond technology, such as fairness and efficiency in the housing economy.

The Current "Support Crypto" Movement Lacks Ideology

The current "support crypto" movement, at least up to today, does not have this kind of thinking. If a politician supports your freedom to transact tokens but has not taken a stance on the above issues, then their support for the fundamental ideas of free token transactions is likely different from yours.

Internationalism and Cryptocurrencies

Vitalik expressed, "I and many cypherpunks have always valued internationalism greatly. Internationalism has always been a key blind spot in nationalist equal politics: they take various restrictive economic policies to try to 'protect domestic workers,' but often pay little attention to global inequality issues. A key liberating aspect of the internet is that it theoretically does not distinguish between the wealthiest countries and the poorest. Cryptocurrencies extend these ideals to the world of money and economic interactions."

Reflecting on the True Reasons for "Supporting Crypto"

Vitalik mentioned that if you care about internationalism because of cryptocurrencies, then you should judge politicians based on their attention to the external world according to their policies. This can even be linked to the "crypto industry" itself. While attending EthCC, Vitalik received messages from friends who couldn't attend because they found it challenging to obtain Schengen visas. The U.S. doesn't score well in this area. The crypto industry has a unique international character, so immigration law is crypto law. Which politicians and countries recognize this?

Politicians' "Support for Crypto" Not Always Friendly Forever

He stated that if you see a politician being friendly towards cryptocurrencies, check their views on cryptocurrencies from five years ago and their views on related topics from five years ago. In particular, try to find a topic where "supporting freedom" is inconsistent with "supporting businesses"; the copyright wars of the 2000s are a good example.

If you like a politician not just because they support cryptocurrencies, then you should pay attention to their stance on crypto. Political games are far more than just about "who wins the next election."

The Decentralization vs. Acceleration Divide

Vitalik mentioned that if there is a goal divergence between decentralization and acceleration, how would people choose?

Last year, Vitalik conducted a series of polls with not many votes, asking people if they prioritize decentralization or acceleration in an AI context, and the results showed a slight inclination towards the former. While regulation often harms both decentralization and acceleration, there could be situations of divergence.

"Supporting Crypto" for Authoritarian Governments

Vitalik believes that "supporting crypto" in authoritarian governments has its specific style that should be approached with caution. For example, modern Russia's crypto policy is straightforward: using encryption to avoid restrictions is good, but using encryption to make it harder for us to restrict or monitor you is bad.

Is Policy Beef How We Decide Politics?

Are politicians who support cryptocurrencies doing so for the right reasons? Do their visions in tech and political economy align with yours? If so, you should support them and make it clear that this is why you support them. If not, you should steer clear or find better forces to ally with.