When criticism is publicly directed at cryptocurrencies, a fierce debate begins. The conflict comes down to the old guard of financiers who have grown fat with their riches over the years and the smart savants who have invested industriously into cryptocurrencies and been rewarded.
I am often asked if I will “return to cryptocurrency” or begin regularly sharing my thoughts on the topic again. My answer is a wholehearted “no”, but to avoid repeating myself I figure it might be worthwhile briefly explaining why here…
— Jackson Palmer (@ummjackson) July 14, 2021
However, it's not very often that you hear the co-creator of a cryptocurrency give it a rough time. But that’s what Dogecoin co-founder Jackson Palmer did in a series of polite tweets about the current cryptocurrency system favoring the “powers that may be” at the expense of the average person.
Where does crypto leave the average person?
His tweets quickly stirred anti-Palmer sentiment among people throwing around snide remarks that “someone was salty” because they had missed out on cashing in on cryptocurrencies, referring to Palmer's initial dismissal of the currencies as a “joke” and precisely what drove him to participate in the creation of Dogecoin.
Palmer didn't engage in the exchanges, but simply noted: “But these days even the most modest critique of cryptocurrency will draw smears from the powerful figures in control of the industry and the ire of retail investors who they’ve sold the false promise of one day being a fellow billionaire. Good-faith debate is near impossible.”
His composure does beg the question if he has a point? Are cryptocurrencies now a continuation of the capitalist system that we have all rallied against? Sure, you don't have Warren Buffet or George Soros rubbing it in your face when talking about crypto, but you still have the crypto whales, and even Elon Musk, who are capable of swaying the markets with such severity and suddenness that nobody can prepare for it.
Where does this leave the average person? According to Palmer – not in a good position. So is one of the most prominent community figures correct to surmise that the new capitalists involved in digital currencies are an extension of the status quo?
The question of regulation
Palmer also noted that there was a significant lack of regulation in crypto which makes the potential abuse of power much simpler when there are not the traditional checks and balances of mainstream finance to weigh in and protect consumers.
However, Palmer is not a crypto-denier, he just brings up a viable question. Has crypto gone unregulated for too long? Is the state of relative lawlessness allowing some people to get rich at the expense of others?
It's true that regulators and financial institutions dismissed cryptocurrencies for far too long allowing for many scams to breed, but now crypto seems to be here to stay.
This means that sooner or later, the decentralized model will have to come under scrutiny and Palmer is only asking the first of many serious questions that the crypto industry should be able to respond to if it wants to shape up as a true libertarian alternative to an overly centralized financial system.