馬克·安德森在喬·羅根播客上揭露拜登政府的“私有化製裁制度”

馬克安德森最近因在喬羅根播客上揭露拜登政府所謂的「私有化製裁制度」而成為頭條新聞。

Marc Andreessen recently joined the Joe Rogan podcast to discuss a concerning topic: the Biden administration’s alleged “privatized sanctions regime.” According to Andreessen, a number of politically exposed persons (PEPs) in the tech and crypto industries have been systematically debanked in what appears to be a modern-day resurrection of Operation Chokepoint, a controversial Obama-era program. Originally aimed at restricting financial access to industries deemed undesirable, this new iteration allegedly targets individuals and organizations whose politics conflict with prevailing government preferences.

馬克安德森 (Marc Andreessen) 最近加入了喬羅根 (Joe Rogan) 播客，討論了一個令人擔憂的話題：拜登政府所謂的「私有化製裁制度」。安德森表示，科技和加密行業的一些政治公眾人物（PEP）已被系統性地剝奪銀行帳戶，這似乎是奧巴馬時代一項有爭議的計劃「窒息點行動」的現代復活。最初的目的是限制對被認為不受歡迎的行業的金融准入，據稱這一新舉措針對的是政治與現行政府偏好相衝突的個人和組織。

This claim shows the troubling nexus between financial gatekeepers and government power—a longtime theory touted by Crypto Bros worldwide, now brought into the mainstream discussion. And I’m glad to see it, as someone who has been calling out the risks of such censorship from “Big Tech, Big Banks, and Big Gov” and being roundly dismissed as a spooky conspiracy theorist.

這一說法顯示了金融看門人與政府權力之間令人不安的關係——這是全世界加密兄弟長期吹捧的理論，現在已進入主流討論。我很高興看到這一點，因為有人一直在呼籲「大科技、大銀行和大政府」的這種審查制度的風險，並被徹底斥為一個幽靈般的陰謀論者。

By leveraging private banking institutions to carry out political censorship, governments circumvent due process and accountability, leaving the targeted individuals without recourse. As Andreessen aptly described, this is censorship by proxy, a chilling precedent in a democracy.

透過利用私人銀行機構進行政治審查，政府規避了正當程序和問責制，使目標個人無法追索。正如安德森恰當地描述的那樣，這是代理審查，是民主制度中令人毛骨悚然的先例。

A necessary stand—but an unfortunate irony

一個必要的立場——但卻是一個不幸的諷刺

Andreessen deserves credit for calling out these abuses, but his advocacy comes with a bitter irony. As the driving force behind a16z Capital and its parent, Andreessen Horowitz, two of the most influential venture capital firms in Silicon Valley, Andreessen has heavily shaped the landscape of cryptocurrency and fintech investment for over a decade. This is on top of him generally being a Democratic Party supporter and donor for many years despite things like the original Operation Chokepoint occurring under the Obama administration.

安德森因揭露這些濫用行為而值得讚揚，但他的倡議卻帶有諷刺意味。作為矽谷最具影響力的兩家創投公司 a16z Capital 及其母公司 Andreessen Horowitz 背後的推動力量，安德森十多年來一直在很大程度上塑造了加密貨幣和金融科技投資的格局。除此之外，他多年來一直是民主黨的支持者和捐助者，儘管在歐巴馬政府時期發生了最初的「阻塞點行動」等事件。

Unfortunately, the portfolio of his firm also reveals the same imprudence and hypocrisy with a track record of prioritizing hype-driven projects over technologies that could have fortified financial sovereignty and reduced the friction of global commerce.

不幸的是，他的公司的投資組合也暴露出同樣的輕率和虛偽，其記錄是優先考慮炒作驅動的項目，而不是可以加強金融主權和減少全球商業摩擦的技術。

Instead of focusing on tools that could replace the need for centralized financial systems, a16z has funneled billions into ventures that have merely reinforced the existing banking paradigm. Projects like Coinbase (NASDAQ: COIN), OpenSea, and Solana have done little to challenge the centralized structures they claim to disrupt. Coinbase, for instance, operates more like a traditional bank, complete with stringent KYC (Know Your Customer) processes and compliance with government demands, than the decentralized vision Bitcoin was built to achieve.

a16z 沒有專注於可以取代中心化金融體系需求的工具，而是將數十億美元投入僅強化現有銀行範式的企業。 Coinbase（納斯達克股票代碼：COIN）、OpenSea 和 Solana 等項目幾乎沒有採取任何行動來挑戰他們聲稱要破壞的中心化結構。例如，Coinbase 的營運更像是一家傳統銀行，擁有嚴格的 KYC（了解你的客戶）流程並遵守政府要求，而不是比特幣旨在實現的去中心化願景。

The a16z portfolio: Opportunity squandered

a16z 產品組合：機會被浪費

In fact, a quick glance at a16z’s largest investments tells a tale of missed potential:

事實上，快速瀏覽 a16z 最大的投資就可以看出一個錯失潛力的故事：

These ventures have generated substantial profits for a16z and its partners, but they have done little to advance the original ethos of Bitcoin: creating a censorship-resistant, borderless, and inclusive financial system.

這些企業為 a16z 及其合作夥伴帶來了可觀的利潤，但它們對推進比特幣的原始精神：創建一個抗審查、無國界和包容性的金融體系幾乎沒有做任何事情。

What Bitcoin could have been—and still can be

比特幣本來可以是什麼，現在仍然可以是什麼

Bitcoin, as originally envisioned in Satoshi Nakamoto’s white paper, was meant to be a peer-to-peer electronic cash system, capable of solving the exact problems Andreessen now laments. Properly implemented, Bitcoin offers:

正如中本聰白皮書中最初設想的那樣，比特幣是一種點對點電子現金系統，能夠解決安德森現在所感嘆的問題。如果實施得當，比特幣可以提供：

Instead of supporting the scalability and evolution of Bitcoin to realize these goals, the narrative of “digital gold” was prioritized, turning BTC into a speculative asset rather than a tool for economic transformation. This shift, fueled by Silicon Valley’s investment dollars, has stifled the adoption of Bitcoin as money and delayed its revolutionary potential by years.

優先考慮「數位黃金」的敘述，而不是支持比特幣的可擴展性和進化來實現這些目標，將比特幣變成一種投機資產，而不是經濟轉型的工具。在矽谷投資資金的推動下，這種轉變抑制了比特幣作為貨幣的採用，並使其革命潛力延遲了數年。

The real risk of censorship

審查制度的真正風險

The resurgence of Operation Chokepoint tactics underscores the urgency of returning to Bitcoin’s original mission while snuffing out the influence of the guys who are happy to be heroes on Sunday morning while being villains every Saturday night Without robust, censorship-resistant financial systems, we are left vulnerable to the whims of powerful entities—both government and corporate. Andreessen has highlighted a real and present danger, but his own role in advancing a centralized, hype-driven “crypto economy” cannot stand without scrutiny.

「阻塞點行動」策略的復甦凸顯了回歸比特幣最初使命的緊迫性，同時消滅那些樂於在周日早上成為英雄而在每個週六晚上成為惡棍的人的影響如果沒有強大的、抗審查的金融體系，我們就會被留下容易受到強大實體（政府和企業）的突發奇想的影響。安德森強調了一個真實而現實的危險，但他自己在推動中心化、炒作驅動的「加密經濟」方面所扮演的角色不能未經審查。

Imagine what could have been if a fraction of a16z’s investment capital had gone toward scaling Bitcoin for global commerce. The tools to prevent financial censorship, ensure privacy, and streamline economic activity already exist. The blockchain wars have made this clear: blockchains like BSV, with unbounded scalability and cost-effective transaction capabilities, have the potential to achieve the kind of financial revolution that Andreessen himself advocates for—if only they received the support they deserve.

想像一下，如果 a16z 的一小部分投資資本用於擴大比特幣的全球商業規模，會發生什麼事。防止金融審查、確保隱私和簡化經濟活動的工具已經存在。區塊鏈戰爭已經清楚地表明了這一點：像BSV 這樣的區塊鏈，具有無限的可擴展性和具有成本效益的交易能力，有潛力實現安德森本人所倡導的那種金融革命——只要它們得到應有的支持。

Why not support the R&D necessary to integrate Teranode with Amazon Web Services (AWS)?

為什麼不支援將 Teranode 與 Amazon Web Services (AWS) 整合所需的研發？

Why not participate in solving the token back-to-genesis problem?

為什麼不參與解決代幣回溯問題呢？

Why not invest in deploying true Simplified Payment Verification (SPV) and LiteClient solutions for a scalable future?

為什麼不投資部署真正的簡化支付驗證 (SPV) 和 LiteClient 解決方案以實現可擴展的未來？

Because he doesn’t actually care about the problem. He wants to talk about the problem to pad his reputation and get back into the conversation so he can get first dibs on the next round of juicy pitch decks during the incoming bull market.

因為他其實並不關心這個問題。他想透過談論這個問題來提升自己的聲譽，並重新回到對話中，這樣他就可以在即將到來的牛市期間在下一輪精彩的融資中獲得優先權。

In closing

結束時

Andreessen’s revelations about the Biden administration’s financial overreach are both alarming and important. But frankly, pointing at a problem is the easy part. He is also asking

安德森對拜登政府財務越權行為的揭露既令人震驚又重要。但坦白說，指出問題是最容易的部分。他也在問