I have a bold take: all Chinese-run crypto exchanges are essentially a "digital Forbidden City," where exchange bosses can be treated as "emperors," and all exchange drama can be understood as "court politics."

The "Court Politics" of Crypto Exchanges: Power Struggles and Loyalty Games

I have a bold take: all Chinese-run crypto exchanges are essentially a "digital Forbidden City," where exchange bosses can be treated as "emperors," and all exchange drama can be understood as "court politics."

Some emperors are like Jiajing—devoted to their own pursuits, masters of imperial manipulation, pitting factions against each other, turning a blind eye to internal corruption, willing to share some power, and ensuring their inner circle prospers when they rise.

Others demand absolute loyalty, act decisively, tolerate no bargaining, and swiftly eliminate anyone who seeks more benefits or challenges their authority.

Let’s briefly discuss the "court politics" within crypto exchanges—purely speculative and for entertainment only.

Power Struggles
To understand court politics, one must first abandon naive notions of absolute good and evil, loyalty and treachery.

In 1566: The Ming Dynasty, Yan Song is reviled by history as a corrupt official, yet his political acumen kept him securely in power for years, even helping fill the state coffers. Meanwhile, when the "upright faction" took over, their aggressive anti-corruption campaigns left the treasury even emptier.

Are there truly pure loyalists and traitors? No—only those who are useful to the emperor at a given moment, those who rise through struggle, and those who fall from it.

Where there are people, there are power struggles.

Power hinges on personnel. The conflict between Yan Song and Xu Jie centered on control over appointments in the Ming court—who could place their own people in key ministries and offices would wield real influence over governance.

The power struggles in crypto exchanges are no different. At their core, they revolve around control over critical roles—departments like listings, finance, and investments. With limited spots and high demand, clashes are inevitable.

Bosses often encourage such infighting.

When subordinates compete, they’re less likely to form strong alliances that could challenge authority. Rival factions eagerly supply the boss with dirt on each other, providing a fuller picture of internal dynamics and leverage over underlings.

Of course, such conflicts must remain controlled. Excessive infighting wastes resources, hampers efficiency, and can destabilize the entire organization.

If one faction grows too powerful, threatening the boss’s authority, the boss may deploy "imperial tactics"—such as promoting internally or hiring an outsider to clean house.

For Emperor Jiajing, the core question was: How does one choose truly reliable ministers in a court where loyalty is ambiguous?

Exchange bosses face the same dilemma.

Competitors and regulators pose visible threats, but the greatest danger often lurks closer—betrayal by those nearby. Hence, nepotism becomes the default solution: key roles go to family, friends, or classmates, even if they lack expertise.

Ironically, in crypto, nepotism or "husband-and-wife shops" often prove the safest model.

Corruption and Anti-Corruption
Power struggles inevitably involve corruption and anti-corruption—two sides of the same coin, both tools for gaining influence.

In court politics, timing and alignment are everything.

Alliances require a "bond"—shared hometowns, schools, or careers. But above all, they require interest. Even personal ties rely on money to sustain them.

How does one earn the "big boss’s" trust?

Beyond emotional support, the most effective method is handing over leverage—voluntarily exposing weaknesses. "Boss, here are my flaws. You hold them. I’m yours now."

Thus, bribery or participation in collective corruption becomes the ultimate loyalty test. Money ties people together, ensuring mutual support.

In crypto exchanges, internal corruption and insider trading are hard to eradicate for two reasons:

1. Profit-driven motives: Whether trading or working, most enter crypto for one goal—to get rich. Employees, especially those from traditional industries, often lack loyalty or belonging, focusing only on maximizing earnings in the shortest time.

2. Legal gray zones: Compared to traditional firms, corruption in exchanges faces fewer legal consequences. Issues are easily downplayed or dismissed, and perpetrators can simply walk away—mission accomplished.

This creates a long-term hiring challenge for exchanges.

The Emperor’s Weakness
Crypto exchange bosses share a tragic trait with emperors: the higher their status, the harder it is to build genuine trust.

Everyone around them has an agenda—some covet power, others wealth, some harbor ulterior motives. In such an environment, suspicion becomes instinct, caution a habit.

This trust deficit shrinks the decision-making circle.

Growing up, many wonder: Why do emperors always keep a "villain" close—and favor them?

Emperors are lonely. They lack neither money nor power—they lack love and loyalty. This is their vulnerability.

If someone offers unwavering devotion, even if mediocre in skill, they become invaluable.

In the digital Forbidden City of exchanges, technical talent, marketing geniuses, and even capital are abundant. The rarest commodity is true loyalty.

Love and loyalty manifest simply: support the emperor unconditionally, even in absurdity. The more outrageous the act, the firmer the support, proving devotion.

Running a crypto exchange is grueling—battling competitors, hackers, and regulators. Bosses often grow exhausted, even self-doubting. Was success due to brilliance or luck? At such times, they crave external validation: "You’re right. It’s all thanks to you. We’re grateful."

Humans aren’t unfeeling machines. Recognition, love, and being needed are innate desires.

Ordinary people crave these too, but survival needs dominate. Only those atop the hierarchy can afford to chase higher fulfillment.

The Emperor’s Women
This isn’t about palace gossip—it’s about female executives.

Exchanges often have many women in leadership, and for good reason.

A legendary traditional finance mogul famously preferred female executives. In his view, women were more loyal. "No matter how much you pay a man, he’ll never be satisfied. Many, after gaining power and wealth, feel no gratitude—just inflated confidence, thinking, ‘I could do this myself.’"

Power’s essence is a thirst for loyalty and fear of betrayal.

In hyper-competitive exchanges, bosses dread "raising their own gravediggers."

Male executives, once empowered, often see their roles as stepping stones. They credit success to personal merit, not mentorship, and are likelier to leave—to compete or climb higher.

Female executives tend to exhibit stronger organizational loyalty, prioritizing stability over risky ventures. They’re more likely to attribute success to teamwork and leadership, valuing existing roles and relationships.

Moreover, crypto exchanges face constant crises and user communications—areas where women excel.

For instance, women generally outperform in recognizing, understanding, and responding to emotions—critical when calming angry users or managing PR crises. Men, by contrast, often react defensively, escalating conflicts.

Thus, in my view, the power of women in crypto is vastly underestimated.

Epilogue
It’s fascinating. No matter how technology evolves—whether in traditional business or crypto—the nature of power remains unchanged.

Where there are people, there are power plays.

The moon wanes when full; water overflows when brimming. Such is the fate of all power games.