War And Crypto
Given an inability of all contemporary, centralized governance systems to provide us with the major necessity good - a peaceful co-existence - the main question on our minds is 'How the militarists geopolitics will affect crypto market?'.
Here's the Evernomics perspective:
An increased military as well as social, political and economic altercations among three world's leading Constructs (C1 - controls trade, C2 - controls resources, C3 - controls labor force) will, on a long run, lead to a militarization of middle-grounds and a consequent weaponization of major technologies, including cryptocurrencies.
It will also result in series of regulatory crack-downs (coming from all three Constructs' sides) on main independent protocols, coins / tokens and platforms, specially, those in the DeFi space, which have identifiable entities / individuals standing behind its. Constructs will be pressuring them heavily to join to the 'cause' or to be shut down. During a war-time nothing will be allowed to stand on the way of peoples with guns defending (or pretending to defend) 'national interests'.
However, some political compromise with corporations holding on to their cross-border business interests will have to made because militarists have to have something to staff their soldiers-gun-meet with and to build better mass-extermination machines. Additionally, encouraging insurrections, civic non-compliances as well as guerrilla insurgencies behind enemies' front-lines and on middle-grounds will require some seamless, intractable digital moneys too.
Therefore, some of the most resilient untraceable protocols will exist in those relatively small niches. On top of that, local population (specially, that under the C2 and C3 controls) will have to use cryptocurrencies to obtain some categories of goods and services, specially, those which will be artificially rarefied by all types of economic isolationisms.
Moreover, as the Constructs will try to boost a mobilization of their internal resources in order to achieve the 'fast and clean victory', their financial policies focus will be shifting towards cross-all-industries regulations (including, a fast-track nationalization), heavier taxations as well as a policing of small and medium businesses.
That will lead to an increasing number of entrepreneurs starts to use crypto-currencies to avoid their businesses going under-water. It will also stimulate a creation of small, closely-tight survivalist communities which will try to become self-sufficient in different parts of the world using their own coins / tokens for that.
Naturally, implementing those types of back-and-white, war-focused Constructs' financial policies will split crypto-currencies to several disconnected markets (f.e. 'legally supported, CBDC-driven, pseudo-decentralized currencies', 'nefarious, dark-rebellions-money', 'survivalists cash', 'economic pressure avoidance, shadow business tokens' etc). Bridging between those markets will be possible but risky.
That complicated environment will be added by smaller, middle-grounds constructs (disputed by C1, C2 and C3) coming out with confused economic policies of their own. Some of those policies might allow for chosen independent protocols local proliferation. However, the number of those protocols will be limited and severely monitored by local security apparatuses which will be fearful of guerrilla groups using its to finance their insurgencies.
Overall, we can expect that a very complicated, puzzled, conflicting, patched decentralized-centralized chain-environment will replace the current unified crypto-market space.
Consequently, for a given crypto-currency to survive such a transition there must be a number of characteristics attached to its today, including:
an apparent usability;
an affiliation with ‘fully, legally compliant’ or ‘dark, interference free’ protocols;
a cold wallet storage option.
In short, from the SVET Analytics point of view, 'System' and 'Tokenomics' Quadrants will take precedent over 'Vision' and 'Exec' ones.