Let’s consider two main trends in the space:

1. Blockchain as a technology — there is a nuclear arms race for the next best blockchain.

2. Cryptocurrency as a disrupting force—this acts to destabilize and disrupt the world’s financial and state actors.

Blockchain as a technology is largely benign and community/consumer focused. It will serve to open up more transparency and collaboration in various world markets.

Cryptocurrency as a disruptive force is starting to emerge as an ancient narrative for the digital age—i.e. unregulated ‘chaos’ vs transparent order. This is the battle between community-based autonomy, privacy and anonymity— versus transparency, compliance and stately order.

In the United States we’ve seen this narrative play out since the 1800's:

• States’ rights vs the Federal government

• The autonomous and private individual vs government constraints

• Global cooperation and financial compliance vs state and individual autonomy— we’ve seen this with organizations like the United Nations and the European Union

In other countries around the world this narrative is vastly more acute and important.

To date, global financial disruption has been constrained by things like real-estate, trade, shipping ports and the transparency and influence of the international banking system. USD $1M weighs 22 pounds and has a volume of 0.01282 cubic meters, or 0.45 cubic feet. Gold is heavier and more dense. Classic cars are much heavier and much less dense. Art is fragile and large. Real-estate cannot be moved. Sending an international wire for USD $50k is no small task. It is clear that value in the traditional system is highly constrained.

Unfortunately not everything that is said in the public debate is correct. Especially if it goes into more detail, everything is quickly mixed up or lumped together and in the worst case it is complete nonsense. In addition, there is a one-sided focus on one aspect of crypto, namely the price gains and losses of Bitcoin.

On top of this, people often use an extreme frame to describe crypto. This frame projects an image of industry-wide opposition to regulation and the government and direct or indirect association with fraud, criminals and (extreme) right-wing groups.

The reason this frame exists is not much different than for topics such as immigration or climate change: it is mainly the loudest people and the extremes that receive attention. Sam Bankman-Fried and FTX, both before and after FTX’s implosion, are a good example of this. A group of noisy anti-crypto people, with sometimes unclear agenda's, also contribute eagerly to this frame about crypto.

The result of this frame is that many people get a negative image of crypto without really knowing what it is and what its purpose is. Too many people see crypto as nothing more than a ponzi scheme with no underlying value whatsoever. And unfortunately in many cases that is true. But in many other cases, in contrast to what the critics want the public to believe, this is not true.

For critics of crypto it’s easy to lump all the good and the bad of crypto together and denounce it all as a scam. But it’s also dishonest and intellectually lazy. Worst of all, it’s insulting to all the honest, smart and hardworking people that work in the crypto industry and have a genuine interest in blockchain technology and the decentralized vision behind it.

Degrading them all to people that just “want to get rich quick”, as I’ve seen critics frequently do, is plain wrong. They don’t say this about people joining any other non-crypto startup. While all start-up workers, crypto and non-crypto alike, have the same hopes and expectations when it comes to (possible) rewards when things go well. A lot can be said about the merits of these kinds of compensations, but singling out crypto and denouncing it because of this is unfair, to say the least.

Most people working in crypto do this because they believe that blockchain technology can positively impact our society. In public this gets sometimes blown up as if crypto will lead us to some kind of new utopia. There are others who, sometimes vehemently, argue the opposite and see crypto as something inherently evil. Heated and polarising debates are a sign of our social media times, but it often doesn’t reflect reality, like in this case.

Then what is the reality of crypto? This is what I will explore in a series of articles. My goal is to paint a more nuanced picture about the state of crypto. I hope it helps people to see through the extreme frame that is often used and helps them draw their own informed conclusions. I’ll do this by publishing various articles addressing different aspects of crypto, starting with an explanation of what the term "crypto" means and why people confuse it with money (which it isn’t).

Follow me on Medium, Twitter or LinkedIn to keep up to date.