The virtues of crypto-currencies are similar to the virtues of the world wide web. In its early days the internet was ignored by the government, was a haven for free speech, was incredibly democratic, was a place where genuine free enterprise flourished and was a place that policed itself. There are many parts of the world wide web that still function in the aforementioned manner. That being said, there exists an increasing trend of corporations with outwardly devious agendas ranging from Alphabet (Google’s parent company) to Facebook that are busily monopolising the world wide web. The result is that freedom of speech is being curtailed and censored, small businesses are being crushed by the major corporations that function as a lawless oligopoly and companies that function as public utilities continue to evade even the most basic provisions of regulation that existing utilities have been subject to for many decades.
Crypto-currencies and the blockchain technology that enables their proliferation had an equally optimistic beginning as did the world wide web. Crypto-currencies have allowed people the ability to transact as free men and women without being forced by state authority to accept a specific fiat currency. In this sense, crypto-currencies have allowed one of the principles of the Austrian school of economics to flourish – the ability to use whatever source of money one wishes in the pursuit of mutually free transitions among free men and women and the businesses they own and operate.
With the announcement that Facebook is seeking to launch its own crypto-currency, one developed a sinking feeling that the same corrupt oligopoly that helped to destroy internet freedoms are now going to try and monopolise the crypto-currency universe. The dangers are self-evident.
In a hypothetical world where commerce would be transacted via a Facebook crypto-currency, the same devious corporation that bans people’s ability to speak freely and to promote their businesses in a normal fashion wold now be able to prohibit people from accessing their own money. Such a system would allow Facebook and their friends in the Silicon-Industrial Complex to do to individuals in countries like the United States what the US government does to countries like Iran, Russia and Venezuela. If anyone wants to give Facebook the ability to sanction one’s access to one’s own money and to the open market, they truly must have more than a few screws loose.
The good news is that whilst most people in the last decade naively embraced social media outlets like Facebook under the false assumption that they would uphold the traditions of freedom and decentralisation that had hitherto defined the world wide web, today, people are increasingly wise to the lies – to the corruption, to the villainy and to the political agenda behind companies like Facebook and the rest of the Silicon-Industrial Complex.
Facebook may well have over-stepped its mark by trying to enter the crypto-currency business. Whilst free speech remains an abstract concept for those who have not had their lives destroyed through censorship, everyone realises that their financial security is deeply important on a day-to-day basis and in the long term. As such, it would appear that many individuals are sceptical about giving Facebook and similar companies even more monolithic control over their daily lives.
Whilst some people might be excited about integrating their social media experiences with their financial activities, many more will realise that a company as unethical and as totalitarian in its principles as Facebook should not be trusted with one’s pocketbook.