Why Do Bitcoin Maximalists Openly Advocate Centralization?
Crypto bought in exchanges is not our crypto. In this case, the exchanges hold the private keys, not the user.
The danger of relinquishing control of the private keys to a third party is losing our funds. Custodial wallets, exchanges, and lending platforms all come with the risk of losing our funds.
Exchanges get hacked, and funds are lost.
Users in control of the private keys with non-custodial wallets will never face issues since the private key (and seed phrase) is the key to unlocking our funds and transferring our crypto on the blockchain.
The message of financial sovereignty only applies out of the centralized services.
Yet, plenty of popular Bitcoin (BTC) advocates keep promoting conflicting messages.
Are the BTC maximalists openly advocating centralization and why?
The Adam Back, Celsius & Tether/Bitfinex Liaison
Without a doubt, the control of the keys is not made clear to newcomers, and there have been dozens of millions of new users/investors.
Still, even to investors, a centralized exchange or a platform offering yield is a danger.
Most platforms and exchanges will eventually fail and will leave nothing behind but losses for their investors when they do.
Celsius was one of those high-risk/high-yield platforms, especially considering the background of many of its executives and their methods.
I've warned about Celsius while there was still time for users of that platform to withdraw (Celsius Network: A Crypto Custodian With Multiple Red Flags). However, it was influencers like Adam Back with a loud voice on social media covering the voice of reason.
While many of us in the crypto field were ringing alarms on Celsius, Back was calling us FUDsters.
(Source)
This is what the internet has become with social media, where popular individuals abuse their influence and force their opinion.
Adam Back is supposedly an advocate of freedom to transact financially, but will often post supportive Tether (USDT) messages as iFinex (the parent company of Tether and Bitfinex) is sponsoring his private company (Blockstream).
Celsius worked closely with Tether, so why not support Celsius as well?
Then, there's all that LN adoption in El Salvador, where the same maxis advocate centralized Lightning wallets like Strike and Chivo.
Were the maxis ever interested in the permissionless and censorship-resistant nature of the decentralized blockchain?
Are maxis interested in not destroying Bitcoin? It seems they don't practice what they preach.
In Conclusion
Regarding the title, the answer is simple:
Anything that helps the number go up.
Maximalism is a by-product (of the outcome) of the blocksize debate and a tool at the hands of Blockstream to spread propaganda and sustain ignorance.
There is a reason the BTC user base evolved into a cult, and it's the opposite of advocating freedom of money.
The champion of BTC and Bitcoin maximalism, Adam Back (for many a Satoshi candidate), supports fractional reserve lending platforms (Celsius), centralized stablecoins ($USDST), and custodial wallets in control of the funds.
Tether has already exercised (multiple times) the option to freeze funds (USDT), which leaves no doubts about its use case within crypto as a tool of financial control.
Adam Back could not foresee the collapse of Celsius was imminent and while many of us tried to create awareness and save a few folks, Back used his power as a social media influencer to downplay research and logic as FUD.
Blockstream's models can predict the price of $1m for BTC but can't detect obvious scams and Ponzis before they implode.
Claiming everything else than BTC is a shitcoin, but supporting a centralized token pegged to the US dollar without ever being audited on its reserves is hypocritical.
Which side are the maxis on (today), and what will be the next narrative?
Maxis fully support centralized stablecoins, custodial wallets, and lending platforms.
I'm pretty sure not everyone in the Bitcoin community enjoys this.
Cover Picture: Pixabay link1 & Pixabay link2
Also Read:
Posting on:
● read.cash ● noise.cash ● Medium ● Hive ● Steemit ●Vocal
● Minds ● Publish0x ● Twitter ● Reddit
Copyright Disclaimer:
Material published in this content, is used for entertainment and educational purposes and falls within the guidelines of fair use. No copyright infringement intended. If you are, or represent, the copyright owner of images used in this article, and have an issue with the use of said material, please notify me.
Don't forget to Subscribe and Like if you enjoyed this article!
"Not your eyes, not your Crypto" is the basic and core foundation of Crypto, seems like Bitcoin is no longer adhering to it so its no longer a Crypto in true sense.