Every invention or discovery the world has ever seen came to be because of the inadequacy of the present. Steam engines evolved because of the inadequacy of transportation, computers and mobile phones evolved because of the inadequacy of technology, and the Internet was born out of the inadequacy of communication and information. Bitcoin too was created out of inadequacy. The inadequacy of the government.
Decentralized currency was initiated on the pretext of relinquishing the shackles of financial control that central banks’ applied on its citizens. A currency that was disconnected from the government of domicile, unaffected by macro-economic policies, and operated on logic, not authority, was seen as a boon to those who longed for financial freedom. Bitcoin, the brainchild of this principled position, was created to usurp its fiat superiors and create a system that was both a medium of exchange and a store of value.
Regulators, however, were not too keen on allowing a currency that operated without a centralized figurehead to steamroll the traditional economic and financial system and hence, they engaged in exerting political pressure.
BITCOIN ATTRACTS REGULATION
Since the heydays of Bitcoin, there has been a well-documented effort by lawmakers, regulators, central bank chiefs and global monetary authorities to clamp down on Bitcoin and the larger cryptocurrency industry.
Adopting a varied framework, countries have approached the concept of regulation in a diverse manner, rather than a hard-and-fast rule. Some central banks have gone soft and issued warnings to its citizens against investing in crypto, citing volatility and speculation, with its use in illegal activities being one of the most prominent pitches. Countries like Australia and Canada have brought crypto-laws under the guise of AML/CTF laws. From on-shore investment restrictions like in Qatar and Bahrain, an outright ban like in Nepal,