As builders and advocates in the blockchain space, it’s easy to divorce ourselves from the rest of the world. For those truly invested in the growth of the crypto economy, however, it’s hard to ignore the massive role that macro conditions can play on the development of tech in the space. With election season just around the corner, and this presidential election gearing up to be the most consequential one for the future of crypto, the recent article from Blockworks set off a powder keg on social media. The rest of this article will take an objective look at the article, the reaction, and its implications going forward.

In their article, Blockworks argued that prioritizing crypto in the voting process is misguided.  According to them, single-issue voting based on crypto is a narrow, self-serving approach that neglects the broader implications of governance. The main criticism levied against crypto voters is that they reduce complex political decisions to a single financial interest and that they are primarily motivated by personal financial gain rather than the broader public good.

Objectively speaking, the authors do make some fair points. It’s true that a significant number of people on CT “prioritize their own selfish financial interests over broader societal and ethical concerns”. It’s obvious that macro conditions such as the Uniswap Wells Notice and ETH security battle have hampered growth in the space, and a pro crypto president could mean making a quick buck. And it’s probably true to some extent that crypto messaging from candidates is motivated by political expediency.

But for many builders and advocates in crypto, implying that the goal of the onchain movement is to enrich oneself at the expense of the rest of the community is tone deaf at best and a slap in the face at worst.

What the authors failed to realize is that for the vast majority of users, blockchain is an uplifting technological and financial innovation that offers an alternative to traditional financial systems that have often failed to serve the broader population.

Would “only a fool would vote on crypto alone”? It depends.

Blockchain represents a paradigm shift towards greater financial and personal freedom. By reducing reliance on traditional financial institutions, crypto enables individuals to have greater control over their financial destiny, leading to broader economic participation and resilience, particularly in impoverished communities.

For many third world countries, crypto not only provides financial freedom, but a means to preserve and growth wealth. In nations like Argentina and Venezuela where currency devaluation and hyperinflation has eaten away at people’s wealth and central banks have restricted saving, stablecoins have allowed for citizens to save money and build wealth.

One of the least spoken about benefits of crypto to the broader US and world economies is its ability to spur economic growth. Crypto is a hotbed of innovation, and supportive regulatory environments can foster this innovation, positioning the U.S. (or whoever takes the first steps towards clear regulatory and political support) as a leader in the global digital economy. In addition, more aggressive development in FHE and ZK has been driven by market demand from crypto products. Ignoring the potential of crypto risks stifling a burgeoning industry that could contribute significantly to national and global economic prosperity.

It’s unfair to characterize crypto as being a “single issue” for voters to vote on. In reality, blockchain is a transformative technology that can be far more impactful than in a purely financial sense.

The current administration has not only been characterized by regulatory crackdowns on the crypto industry through the actions of SEC Chair Gary Gensler, the Biden administration itself has taken a strict stance against the industry, promising to stifle innovation. On the flip side, candidates like Robert F. Kennedy Jr.  and Trump have positioned themselves as pro-crypto, promising fewer financial regulations surrounding crypto adoption.

The crypto community's reaction to these political developments has been strong and vocal. Many within the community see the upcoming election as pivotal for the future of crypto in the U.S. Memecoins like $TREMP, $BODEN, and $MAGA, have taken on the role of being cultural markers for market sentiment and exploded in popularity, reaching hundreds of millions of dollars in market cap.

The debate sparked by the Blockworks article underscores the complexities of integrating crypto into the broader political and societal context. Though quite niche, the crypto community is a powerful economic and innovative force on a mission towards widespread adoption. While it is important to consider the various implications of political choices (and for many, these might far outweigh other issues), for many in our community, crypto isn’t just a single issue: it's a vote for culture, finance, personal freedom, and innovation.

As builders and advocates in the blockchain space, it’s easy to divorce ourselves from the rest of the world. For those truly invested in the growth of the crypto economy, however, it’s hard to ignore the massive role that macro conditions can play on the development of tech in the space. With election season just around the corner, and this presidential election gearing up to be the most consequential one for the future of crypto, the recent article from Blockworks set off a powder keg on social media. The rest of this article will take an objective look at the article, the reaction, and its implications going forward.

In their article, Blockworks argued that prioritizing crypto in the voting process is misguided.  According to them, single-issue voting based on crypto is a narrow, self-serving approach that neglects the broader implications of governance. The main criticism levied against crypto voters is that they reduce complex political decisions to a single financial interest and that they are primarily motivated by personal financial gain rather than the broader public good.

Objectively speaking, the authors do make some fair points. It’s true that a significant number of people on CT “prioritize their own selfish financial interests over broader societal and ethical concerns”. It’s obvious that macro conditions such as the Uniswap Wells Notice and ETH security battle have hampered growth in the space, and a pro crypto president could mean making a quick buck. And it’s probably true to some extent that crypto messaging from candidates is motivated by political expediency.

But for many builders and advocates in crypto, implying that the goal of the onchain movement is to enrich oneself at the expense of the rest of the community is tone deaf at best and a slap in the face at worst.

What the authors failed to realize is that for the vast majority of users, blockchain is an uplifting technological and financial innovation that offers an alternative to traditional financial systems that have often failed to serve the broader population.

Would “only a fool would vote on crypto alone”? It depends.

Blockchain represents a paradigm shift towards greater financial and personal freedom. By reducing reliance on traditional financial institutions, crypto enables individuals to have greater control over their financial destiny, leading to broader economic participation and resilience, particularly in impoverished communities.

For many third world countries, crypto not only provides financial freedom, but a means to preserve and growth wealth. In nations like Argentina and Venezuela where currency devaluation and hyperinflation has eaten away at people’s wealth and central banks have restricted saving, stablecoins have allowed for citizens to save money and build wealth.

One of the least spoken about benefits of crypto to the broader US and world economies is its ability to spur economic growth. Crypto is a hotbed of innovation, and supportive regulatory environments can foster this innovation, positioning the U.S. (or whoever takes the first steps towards clear regulatory and political support) as a leader in the global digital economy. In addition, more aggressive development in FHE and ZK has been driven by market demand from crypto products. Ignoring the potential of crypto risks stifling a burgeoning industry that could contribute significantly to national and global economic prosperity.

It’s unfair to characterize crypto as being a “single issue” for voters to vote on. In reality, blockchain is a transformative technology that can be far more impactful than in a purely financial sense.

The current administration has not only been characterized by regulatory crackdowns on the crypto industry through the actions of SEC Chair Gary Gensler, the Biden administration itself has taken a strict stance against the industry, promising to stifle innovation. On the flip side, candidates like Robert F. Kennedy Jr.  and Trump have positioned themselves as pro-crypto, promising fewer financial regulations surrounding crypto adoption.

The crypto community's reaction to these political developments has been strong and vocal. Many within the community see the upcoming election as pivotal for the future of crypto in the U.S. Memecoins like $TREMP, $BODEN, and $MAGA, have taken on the role of being cultural markers for market sentiment and exploded in popularity, reaching hundreds of millions of dollars in market cap.

The debate sparked by the Blockworks article underscores the complexities of integrating crypto into the broader political and societal context. Though quite niche, the crypto community is a powerful economic and innovative force on a mission towards widespread adoption. While it is important to consider the various implications of political choices (and for many, these might far outweigh other issues), for many in our community, crypto isn’t just a single issue: it's a vote for culture, finance, personal freedom, and innovation.