Places like the DPRK, Cuba, and Venezuela are especially relevant when discussing cryptocurrency because it's a technology that allows people in those locations to escape economic totalitarianism. What confuses me is that people in democratic countries are calling a tool of democracy "anti-democratic". It's completely illogical.
It's possible that the same tool can be used either for, or against, democracy, depending on the environment. That's actually what most tools are like. Using cryptocurrency in an authoritarian state can help democratize the state, while using it in an already democratic state has a potential to do more harm than good. It's similar to violence: using it to kill off the ancien regime can (potentially) pave road towards democracy, while using it to put a non-elected person in charge in an already democratic state will shift the state away from democracy.
Disclaimer: I don't have any opinion on this, just reacting to the "completely illogical" comment.
> What confuses me is that people in democratic countries are calling a tool of democracy "anti-democratic". It's completely illogical.
It depends on whether the word "democracy" has any meaning. In a democracy, we get to vote on how economic activity is regulated. Crypto is a tool to avoid democracy.
> In a democracy, we get to vote on how economic activity is regulated. Crypto is a tool to avoid democracy.
Do you consider the Democratic People's Republic of Korea to be a democracy? The people in that country vote overwhelmingly in favor of authoritarian policies there. I believe it's reasonable to argue that true democracy is incompatible with authoritarianism.