A 'cryptorevolution' against a perverse logic of markets

I keep thinking about my previous article about the message being spread about cryptocurrencies to the public in general.

'If Bitcoin is the reference, all cryptocurrencies are like Bitcoin'

That is the hidden logic being spread.

This reductionism of the complex reality of the crypto world to a single model applicable to any cryptocurrency and based on Bitcoin, has terrible consequences if we meditate on it. Think about the implications:

Bitcoin is the cryptocurrency most known by experts and neophytes, since it is the one that gets the most visibility.

Then, Bitcoin is the first choice of newcomers and speculators.

So, Bitcoin becomes the cryptocurrency with the highest capitalization.

Therefore, Bitcoin and its price are taken as a reference in the world of cryptocurrencies, which encourages the media to take it as an example.

And the (vicious) cycle starts all over again.

Some possible consequences:

New investors approach the world of cryptocurrencies and, since the message they have received is purely speculative, they do what all cryptocurrencies seem to have been invented for: speculate.

A silly example: tons of users get into different projects, not with an intention to help to develop them, but to get some satoshis that they will quickly convert into Bitcoin (or FIAT).

Even if they are people with vital needs looking for an extra income, they rush to switch their few satoshis to Bitcoin. As a result, Bitcoin extends its influence over other cryptocurrencies, so what happens to bitcoin in the markets has its mirror effect on the rest of the so-called 'altcoins'.

This means that, even if we are not interested in Bitcoin as a project, we find ourselves caught up in a perverse logic: we need Bitcoin to do well, because whatever happens to Bitcoin drags down the project we do want to support.

Let's take Bitcoin Cash, our favorite (?) project, as an example. Its manifest intention is not to become a speculative asset, but to become a cryptocurrency of common use by all kinds of people: 'the people's currency'. But it is precisely those 'people' who are rushing to exchange their BCH for other currencies that have no real use at all. Nor are they designed for 'the people', but rather they manage to exclude small investors (network costs).

It is a tremendously perverse logic that makes people try to support projects that go against their own interests and weaken those that do fit their needs and desires.

Instead, why not support projects that are in line with their real needs? Why not use, invest or hold Bitcoin Cash? Why not explore the possibilities of smartBCH?

In short: why do they want to shoot themselves in their own foot? To sum up, it is a practical materialization of the 'Tragedy of the commons', as illustrated by Garret Hardin.

However, there is an alternative as Elinor Ostrom pointed out in 'Governing the Commons' .

If we all became aware and support projects that we trust and that favor us, instead of rushing to change currency with speculative goals, if we bet (not even money, but trust) on this project that is Bitcoin Cash, we might start a small 'cryptorevolution' that would free Bitcoin Cash from the influence of Bitcoin.

Perhaps we could see a market in which Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash are really independent.

Maybe we would get to see a chart whereas Bitcoin goes down, Bitcoin Cash goes up, thanks to the support of the common people (those common people that BCH is trying to reach).

And maybe, the next news we see on TV will not be about Bitcoin, but about the diversity of projects, with different users, usage, and goals.

Lead image: Own creation from free vector images under CC license.