CBDC和Stablecoins：特洛伊木馬接種質量？

“比特幣和基督教是不可避免的。相同的價值觀，相同的原理，相同的敵人。” X用戶“ Michael”（@cryptotraveler），2021年9月24日

"Bitcoin and Christianity is inevitable. Same values, same principals, same enemies." X user "Michael" (@cryptotraveler), Sept 24, 24

“比特幣和基督教是不可避免的。相同的價值觀，相同的原理，相同的敵人。” X用戶“ Michael”（@cryptotraveler），9月24日，24日

So, hey, my regulars will know that in addition to copy editing here at the Roswell Daily Record, I’ve also done quite a bit of work for some notable names in the bitcoin industry. The one I am most proud of — and I mean "tip-top of my resume proud" — was paid copy editing work for the influential lobbying group Bitcoin Policy Institute’s 44-page "Why The U.S. Should Reject Central Bank Digital Currencies," written by Natalie Smolenski with Dan Held, published in 2022 and circulated to the banking industry and U.S. legislators nationwide.

因此，嘿，我的常客還會知道，除了在Roswell Daily Record上複製編輯外，我還為比特幣行業的一些名字做了很多工作。我最引以為傲的是，我的意思是“我的簡歷的尖端”是為有影響力的遊說小組比特幣政策研究所的44頁的付費編輯編輯作品，“為什麼美國應該拒絕中央銀行數字貨幣，由納塔利·斯莫倫斯基（Natalie Smolenski）與丹·史密斯基（Natalie Smolenski）撰寫，丹·史密斯基（Natalie Smolenski）與丹·霍德（Dan Held）一起於2022年出版，並於2022年出版，並於2022年出版給銀行業行業和美國立法者。

Their arguments prevailed. In a January 2024 campaign speech in New Hampshire, Markets Insider (MI) reported that now President Donald Trump said, "Tonight, I’m also making another promise to protect Americans from government tyranny. As your president, I will never allow the creation of a Central Bank Digital Currency. Such a currency would give our federal government absolute control over your money. …"

他們的論點佔了上風。在2024年1月在新罕布什爾州舉行的競選演講中，市場內部人士（MI）報導說，現在唐納德·特朗普總統說：“今晚，我也做出另一個諾言，以保護美國人免受政府暴政的侵害。作為您的總統，我將永遠不允許建立中央銀行的數字貨幣。這樣的貨幣會給我們的聯邦政府政府對您的金錢提供絕對的控制權。

In January 2025, Trump doubled down on this promise. MI reported Trump was joining "... other leading Republicans in coming out against a CBDC. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis … was the first major candidate to speak out in opposition. Vivek Ramaswamy, a Bitcoin advocate, has said ‘hell no’ to one. Tom Emmer, the House Whip, introduced a bill in Congress to ban a U.S. CBDC. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas did something similar in the upper chamber. North Carolina's House of Representatives passed a bill to outlaw a so-called ‘digital dollar’ there."

2025年1月，特朗普憑藉這一諾言加倍。 MI報導說，特朗普正在加入“……其他領先的共和黨人反對CBDC。佛羅里達州州長羅恩·德桑蒂斯（Ron DeSantis）……是第一個在反對派中大聲疾呼的主要候選人。比特幣倡導者維維克·拉馬斯瓦米（Vivek Ramaswamy）對一個人說地獄，對一個人說地獄。眾議院通過了一項法案，以禁止那裡所謂的“數字美元”。”

Sometimes, like now as I write this actually, I still tear up knowing that my work might have played some tiny part in all of the above being realized — in making bitcoin the law of the land. Bitcoiners, in our delusions of grandeur, know well that we are the only line of defense remaining against the New World Order, the Federal Reserve, the International Monetary Fund and the central banks’ unelected “officials” maintaining control of the world’s monetary supply. And with unbegrudging duty, we routinely sacrifice our time and some, our fortunes, to see that such a future is averted and that bitcoin wins in the end.

有時，就像現在我寫這篇文章一樣，我仍然撕毀我的工作可能在上述所有方面都發揮了一定的作用 - 在使比特幣成為土地法律時。比特幣在我們宏偉的妄想中，非常清楚，我們是剩下的唯一反對新世界秩序，美聯儲，國際貨幣基金組織和中央銀行未當選的“官員”的國防線，可維持對世界貨幣供應的控制。而且，由於責任不大，我們通常會犧牲自己的時間，而我們的命運是避免這種未來的，而比特幣最終贏得了勝利。

Breaking ranks and campaigning even at Libertarian events, Trump’s “conversion” to bitcoin was also covered here in November, a column that also opined (quoting myself), "Conversely though, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Congressman Brad Sherman (D-CA), along with Biden-appointed Gary Gensler (D), chairperson of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, have served as the de facto face of the Democratic Party, enforcing unwritten and unclear stances on the bitcoin industry (and all cryptocurrencies that followed). Favoring not merely ‘reasonable’ regulations, which the industry has been pleading for anyway, Dems have enacted several practical chokeholds on the industry’s ability to grow in the United States, raising possible challenges to the U.S. Constitution in some cases … forcing other tech companies to move their jobs and their profits offshore. Being succinct, these so-called ‘representatives’ represent mainly the corporate interests of the legacy banking industry, which helps fund their campaigns, and is losing fees and customers to the superior technology of bitcoin, which does not require any rent-seeking third-party company to operate, to send cross-border to one’s family or to hold permanently."

即使是在自由主義者的事件中，特朗普對比特幣的“轉換”也在11月份進行了介紹，該專欄也被認為（引用自己）。民主黨在比特幣行業上執行不明的立場（以及隨後的所有加密貨幣），不僅是“合理”的法規，無論如何，該行業一直在為這些行業提高了一些在美國的挑戰，因此，該行業在某些情況下促進了一些挑戰，而這些行業在某些情況下都可以促進這些行業的努力……所謂的“代表”主要代表傳統銀行業的公司利益，該行業有助於資助他們的競選活動，並將費用和客戶損失給比特幣的卓越技術，而比特幣的卓越技術不需要任何尋求租金的第三方公司才能運營，將跨境派往一個人的家庭或永久地寄宿。 ”

While not my topics today, two things: First, CBDCs have already effectively been renamed as commercial bank dollar-pegged "stablecoins" now — so called because their values don't fluctuate like bitcoin but hold their $1 value. Bank of America "coin," JP Morgan "coin," Amazon "coin," etc., are all on the very near horizon. The potential danger(s) in this? In 2022, PayPal faced backlash over a proposed new clause leaked before publication that would have fined users $2,500 for spreading “misinformation.” The policy was later withdrawn, but that’s just an example.

雖然今天不是我的話題，但第一件事是：首先，CBDC現在已經有效地更名為商業銀行的“穩定股票” - 之所以如此，是因為它們的價值不會像比特幣那樣波動，而是持有1美元的價值。美國銀行“硬幣”，JP Morgan“ Coin，“ Amazon“ Coin”等，都在地平線上。這潛在的危險嗎？在2022年，貝寶（Paypal）在出版之前洩漏的擬議的新條款面臨強烈反對，該條款將對用戶罰款2500美元，以傳播“錯誤信息”。該政策後來撤回，但這只是一個例子。

Second, it’s a shame that bitcoin at least seems a partisan issue in the U.S. It is not, but those who protect the banks over the people have made it so. Bitcoin itself is the most apolitical, amoral financial instrument ever created. As renowned educator Andreas Antonopoulos stated in a social post years ago, "Bitcoin does not care — nor does it even know — who you are, what you are using it for, where you are using it, or why you are using it."

其次，可惜的是，比特幣至少在美國似乎是一個黨派問題，但那些保護銀行對人民的人已經做到了。比特幣本身是有史以來最不政治的，不政治的金融工具。正如著名的教育家安德烈亞斯·安東尼波洛斯（Andreas Antonopoulos）在幾年前在社交帖子中所說的那樣：“比特幣不在乎 - 甚至不知道 - 您是誰，您在使用它，在哪裡使用它或使用它。”

A 9-year-old girl born in a mud hut in Africa without a birth certificate can use, as the colloquial saying goes, "a $20 Nokia cellphone" with only simple SMS

俗話說，一個沒有出生證明的9歲女孩在非洲沒有出生證明的情況下可以使用，只有簡單的SMS就可以使用“ 20美元的諾基亞手機”