Insight Image

Decentralized and destabilizing? The perceived threat of cryptocurrencies

22 Jun 2022

Decentralized and destabilizing? The perceived threat of cryptocurrencies

22 Jun 2022


The digital economy has pervaded into every sector of our contemporary existence – physical, virtual, and everything in between. While the world has witnessed a steady rate of digitalization of education, entertainment, and commerce over the past few decades, the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the shift to the virtual realm, forcing nations and individuals alike to resort to remote technologies to facilitate a “New Normal”. This was coupled with a boom in cryptocurrencies, digital tokens that appropriate monetary value, which are used virtually but are increasingly circulated in the physical world. From under USD 1,000 per Bitcoin in 2017 to over USD 65,000 per Bitcoin in 2021,[1] the spike in the value of the nascent digital currencies reflect a growing interest in new forms of money, a desire to reap large interest, and as this paper will argue, a craving for a decentralized world order – in this world or the ‘metaverse’. Whether either universe is ready to facilitate such a transition remains a question.

What are cryptocurrencies?

The notion of currency has evolved with the advancement of technology in the past millennia. In 2009, cryptocurrency was introduced to the market, giving a new meaning to “currency”. What makes these crypto-tokens unique is that they are not controlled by any central entity, but rather are decentralized. Cryptocurrencies are characterized by their use of blockchain technology, commonly described as an append-only “distributed register” used to encode monetary value.[2] Their use of blockchain technology makes forgery nearly impossible as consensus across all independent operators in the peer-to-peer network is required before adding another record to the digital ledger. In particular, blockchain technology is used to securely track and verify the transfer of ownership of the digital currencies.[3] The process of verifying transactions is called “mining”.[4]

Despite this characterization, yet appropriate to their decentralized nature, a single standardized definition of cryptocurrencies has not yet been devised.[5] The power of real currencies against cryptocurrencies can be identified with the sum weight of global liquidity and the rate that has been reached by cryptocurrencies. According to the Bank of International Settlement, global liquidity was 35 trillion US dollars by the end of the year 2021.[6] In contrast, the latest data of the global weights of cryptocurrency in 2021 surpassed 1 trillion US dollars.[7] Cryptocurrencies cannot be compared to the global liquidity due to the different weights that they both hold.

Such a definition highlights two salient features of cryptocurrencies: (a) the decentralized mode of mining the currencies, and (b) the object biography of any single digital coin. In recognition that financial institutions were necessary intermediaries in facilitating online commerce, the first cryptocurrency was created to bypass the requisite trust in these institutions and facilitate financial transactions.[8] In particular, the blockchain technology utilized for cryptocurrencies replaces trust in any central authority with cryptographic code. Resorting to this mode of pseudo-anonymity, cryptocurrencies mitigate transaction costs, both temporal and pecuniary, and allow customers to evade the dwindling trust in traditional systems of banking and governance.[9] It thus makes sense that the decentralization of authority is a characterizing trait of cryptocurrencies. On the other hand, the emphasis on the biography of any single digital coin is a preventative security measure to hinder asset replication, or what is known as the “double-spending problem”. [10] Because a digital file may always be replicated, the possibility of spending the same digital coin more than once is precisely what necessitates a trusted intermediary to verify any digital transaction. Unlike other forms of digital payment, cryptocurrencies merely shift that responsibility from authorized financial institutions to scattered servers across the world through blockchain technology. This is why tracing ownership becomes decisive; it validates the value of any single digital coin by ensuring that it is not one of the infinite possible digital replicas of the coin.

Yet, despite their name, the designation of “cryptocurrency” as a legitimate form of money continues to be contested. For one, it remains unclear where they stand in relation to traditional fiat money. As Ryan Farell argues, cryptocurrencies do not have intrinsic value, rather derive their value entirely through the forces of supply and demand. They also extract their value from artificial scarcity in the same way other fiat currencies do. However, most cryptocurrencies derive their idiosyncratic values from their respective market caps, likening them more to a speculative asset class than fiat currencies.[11] The primary distinction between cryptocurrencies and other fiat currencies is that the former is unregulated by a central authority, while the latter’s value is entirely dependent on faith in the central issuing body. In “Defining and Regulating Cryptocurrency: Fake Internet Money or Legitimate Medium of Exchange?” Susan Alkadri sets out to outline existing legal definitions of money and, in doing so, argues that decentralized cryptocurrencies, despite not fitting traditional legal definitions of money, function as such.[12] In particular, she emphasizes how they successfully serve as a medium of exchange, despite failing to qualify as legal tenders.

That being said, while it is impossible for cryptocurrencies to be legally issued by governmental authorities, it is possible for cryptocurrencies to be legally recognized by these authorities. Yet, cryptocurrencies are posited as challengers to these hegemonic institutions.

Importance and prevalence of cryptocurrencies

The most popular of the over 10,000 types of cryptocurrencies currently in existence is Bitcoin (BTCUSD), born in 2009 and heralded as the first cryptocurrency.[13] [14] [15] By virtue of being the oldest, Bitcoin is believed to be the most mature of the cryptocurrencies, exhibiting less volatility in price than other more trend-oriented cryptocurrencies; according to Armando Aguilar, Head of Alternative Strategies and Research for a digital asset platform, Ledn,  Bitcoin now closely mimics the movement of S&P500 and NASDAQ with 0.88 and 0.91 respective correlations.[16] Yet, Bitcoin is still volatile. In the past 13 years, Bitcoin has had many rises and falls in tens of thousands of USD due to many factors affecting its weight[17]. According to Kris Marszalek, CEO of, the price of Bitcoin in its first couple of years was below 2 USD until 2011 when it was worth around 30 USD, before going down again to a single digit.[18] Bitcoin began thriving in 2013 when it hit 1,000 USD by the end of the year. The ultimate price that has been reached was back in 2021 when it was around 68,000 USD per Bitcoin, before sinking once again in early 2022. Therefore, it is difficult to predict where Bitcoin will head in the future.

All cryptocurrencies other than Bitcoin are colloquially referred to as “altcoins” – a further testament to Bitcoin’s significance.[19] However, altcoins too have enjoyed increasing attention from the public – particularly from young or tech-savvy investors and counter-culture enthusiasts. While some altcoins are ‘serious’ cryptocurrency alternatives to Bitcoin, like Ethereum and Litcoin, it is pertinent to acknowledge a satirical branch of cryptocurrency that belongs to a larger phenomenon seeking to undermine and express disgruntlement with the current establishment of financial institutions. This is perhaps best exemplified by the emergence of “meme coins” and “meme stock” – meme-inspired cryptocurrency and stock, respectively – which have “gained a cult-like following online and through social media platforms.”[20] Dogecoin (DOGE), the first meme coin, was created in 2013 to “poke fun at Bitcoin,” as CEO of Bitwave, Pat White, attests.[21] Inspired by a popular meme of a Shiba Inu dog, the cryptocurrency branded itself with the image of the dog meme and intentionally misspelled the word “dog” for comedic effect. However, it was only in 2021 that Dogecoin went viral, first on Reddit and then across all corners of the metaverse, a term for the future of cyberspace coined by Mark Zuckerberg,[22] as people across the world got in on the joke and vowed to propel its value “to the moon” – amongst whom was Tesla CEO, Elon Musk.[23] In fact, the price of Dogecoin skyrocketed from just under a penny to $0.68 in the first five months of 2021. This coincided with the rise (and fall) of GameStop (GME), largely regarded as the first meme stock, which began its accelerated ascent in January of 2021. The short squeeze of GameStop was successfully predicted in August of 2020 by YouTuber Roaring Kitty.[24]

Yet, the interest of counter-culture enthusiasts in cryptocurrencies seems to be deeper than its satirical manifestation. Considering thousands of real dollars are being poured from their personal pockets to hedge in the crypto market, it is unlikely that their support of cryptocurrency stems solely from their desire to go against the grain or have a laugh using market forces as the punchline. It is safer to assume that the overwhelming support cryptocurrencies have garnered from this segment is attributable precisely to the characterizing feature of cryptocurrencies: their decentralization.

In an open letter addressed to Ben Arc titled “Why Bitcoin Is Not a Socialist’s Ally,” Yanis Varoufakis, Greece’s former minister of finance and prominent socialist, articulates his concerns about cryptocurrencies and argues that “Bitcoin is not fit for purpose under capitalism, or as a vehicle toward transcending capitalism.” He boils it down to two reasons: (a) Bitcoin’s inherent deficiency in absorbing shocks will likely only benefit the ultra-right as the inevitable free rider problem will pit Bitcoin owners against each other at the onset of any crisis, and (b) the mode of capitalism that facilitated Bitcoin’s ascent will never be eliminated by Bitcoin’s dominance.[25] The same is true of all cryptocurrencies. Their rise within a capitalist structure necessarily means that they will never be able to topple it; even if they wanted to, cryptocurrencies are unable to bite the hands that fed it. As pointed out by Manjoo, “many web3 companies are funded by the same people who built the web we’re now trying to reform.”[26] This indeed explains why traditional financial institutions, like Grayscale, JP Morgan, and Goldman Sachs, are hedging billions of dollars on their seeming demise by expanding their portfolios to include cryptocurrencies.[27]

Whether or not cryptocurrencies are the vehicle for change they have been portrayed to be, it is clear that they will occupy a significant share of our future, as they do our present. In today’s world, cryptocurrencies are increasingly becoming an accepted method of payment for everything from property to apparel and food and beverage.[28] With Gucci and Tesla being amongst the first large retailers to accept cryptocurrencies, it will not be long till others follow suit. The circulation of cryptocurrencies is, and will become, even more prevalent in the virtual realm.[29] With the advent of the metaverse, and all its knickknacks – virtual real estate, virtual apparel and everything in between – it is difficult to imagine corners of the internet that are not susceptible to the reach of cryptocurrencies.

It is true that the metaverse is so far largely unregulated, as is the case of cryptocurrencies. However, the metaverse and its digital economy have not yet dismantled the power hegemony ruling over it. They have implicitly substituted traditional nation states for large corporations, and it is unclear that the latter are equipped for the task of governing.[30] Unlike the real world, instead of being governed by legislation, web3 is governed by money. The bourgeois are neither landlords nor those with social capital, nor authorized legislators, but those with the largest crypto holdings.[31] With the current set up of contemporary capitalism, the option for that course of action is inherently reserved for the elite. It is becoming increasingly apparent that this elite is composed of commercial brands spearheading cryptomania, like Tesla and Facebook.

Two faces of the same coin: Authority and legitimacy

Cryptocurrency exposes how monetary value is entirely derived from public trust in its authority. In the span of a week, dwindling faith in Terra Luna contributed to the 100% loss of its value, crashing from USD 78.35 on May 6, 2022, to USD 0.000016 on May 13, 2022.[32] Faith, in both the system and the particular digital currency, is what lends both their legitimacy. This is true of all money; bank runs especially elucidate the importance of perception and expectation and how they can cause market failures. However, cryptocurrencies are just outlandish enough that they manage to satisfy the standing colloquial understanding of “money” as a medium of exchange, unit of account, and store of value, while at the same time exposing the fragility of the banking system. In her article “Defining and Regulating Cryptocurrency: Fake Internet Money or Legitimate Medium of Exchange?” Susan Alkadri notes that “any insinuation that a string of computer code is an inherently less valid or legitimate representation of value than a piece of paper is misguided.” According to Alkadri, “normative value judgements are not necessarily dictated by the characteristics of the medium itself.” [33] To illustrate this point, the Duke Law graduate presents the example of a 1 USD bill and contrasts it to a 100 USD bill. While they are characterized by minimal physical differences – both are printed paper with holograms, after all – the defining distinction is that collective consensus decrees the latter as having “more purchasing or exchange power” than the first, 100 times more to be exact.[34] The same value judgment can be leveraged onto practically any object; that is how cigarettes, seashells and now NFTs circulate as stores of value. Thus, the legitimacy of any currency is not set in stone (nor gold), but rather a matter of collective agreement.

What does it mean then that cryptocurrencies replace authority from traditional financial institutions and legal tenders with massive corporations and crypto-rich individuals? While the legitimacy of all money is conditional on our faith in it, the volatile market ruling cryptocurrencies only further exacerbates the arbitrary validity of money as we understand it. Speculation in this market invites more instability and it is the crypto consumers that ultimately lose. Indeed, the decentralized nature of the crypto market that was initially attractive to consumers actually means that there is no central authority ensuring their rights or mitigating their risks – or at the very least monitoring transactions for social security purposes.[35] In fact, the pseudo-anonymity of blockchain coupled with the limited regulatory landscape governing the crypto market makes it ripe ground for criminal and illicit activities.[36] Cryptocurrencies are understandably the preferred mode of payment in the Darknet, funding one of the infamous marketplaces in the Darknet, The Silk Road, which operated freely for more than two years until the FBI were able to arrest the owner back in 2013.[37] The criminal cases that have been tied to crypto transactions in this underground market include illicit investment schemes and paid assassinations. Moreover, crypto stands as a new market for tax evasion, as transactions of customers and merchants alike are cheaper and not subject to government-issued sanctions or taxes. This is precisely why governments around the world are threatened by the emergence of cryptocurrencies. They recognize that they no longer fully control the flow of commerce and transactions within their borders,[38] and that, contrary to the branding of a new decentralized world order, cryptocurrencies will shift the power from nation states to anyone willing to pay enough.

To that end, many governments chose to ban cryptocurrency activities, either fully or partially, within their borders. Meanwhile, other sovereign states chose to regulate cryptocurrency in favor of their economies as they see crypto as the future of transactions and financial ownership. Bolivia and Bangladesh are two of the countries that chose to completely ban the use of cryptocurrencies, deeming the act of buying or selling cryptocurrencies as a criminal offense that could lead to up to 12 years in jail.[39] On the other hand, Iceland is one of the states that chose to partially ban cryptocurrencies, permitting mining and owning cryptocurrencies but forbidding foreign exchange trading in cryptocurrencies. Accordingly, Iceland not only serves as a perfect attraction for crypto mining, which requires cold climates for the generators and a flexible business environment, but exemplifies how governmental regulations of the crypto market can “offer greater legitimacy” to the currency while mitigating the risk of criminal activity and at least some of the market volatility.[40]

Crypto regulations around the world

The case of the US

A question arises if crypto is threatening the weight of USD when discussing its effect on governments and authority. However, the fact is that it failed to rival the USD in many terms, including acceptance and stability as a global form of payment. The USD has the ability to maintain its weight globally against all changes that have accrued in the financial market.[41] In terms of global recognition, cryptocurrencies also fall behind the USD, therefore not creating any threat. Regulators around the world have been very cautious with their rules towards the usage of crypto, especially in the bank sector. Compared to the USD, cryptocurrencies are not yet considered a transactional medium in many countries. Although many merchants around the world have started accepting it as a method of payment, the loop flow of crypto is not as efficient as the USD. The US, as an attempt to regulate cryptocurrencies, created Tether which is a digital token that equals one USD per token. The stability of Tether is guaranteed as the value is up to 100% to fiat money unlike other cryptocurrencies. This is a crucial step as the US is aiming to dominate the market of cryptocurrencies by creating the most stable token.

The case of Russia

Russia initially banned all cryptocurrencies, as the Bank of Russia argued that they violated the money-issuing monopoly of the central bank. In 2015, Russia blocked over half a dozen cryptocurrency websites. However, when the Russian government announced in October of 2017 that their central bank is issuing their own digital currency, what they termed the “CryptoRuble”, it became a common misconception that Russia was altering its stance on the crypto market. If anything, the CryptoRuble reinstates Russia’s mistrust of the digital currency landscape and should be read as a feeble attempt at negotiating the digital future with the present stakeholders, for after all, CryptoRuble is not a “cryptocurrency” as defined by this paper. This is because it is (a) issued by the government and (b) not mined on a decentralized basis. Hence, “the value of the CryptoRuble will be identical to the value of a regular rubble” and will function more as a government-issued bond than a true-to-form cryptocurrency.[42] That being said, the recent escalation of Western sanctions on Russia in light of the war in Ukraine has witnessed a renewed Russian interest in cryptocurrencies, likely as a way to evade the Western powers.[43] [44] In fact, rubles spent on Bitcoin increased by 260% during the first month of the conflict, from February 24, 2022 to March 22, 2022.[45] Russian President Vladimir Putin has called on officials to rectify the discrepancy in the Russian attitude towards the crypto market, and the Finance Minister, Anton Siluanov, hopes to resolve it through a clear regulatory framework to be passed by the end of the year.[46]

The case of Venezuela

Back in 2018, a decree was issued to allow the circulation and exchange of crypto assets by both residents and non-residents across private and public sectors in Venezuela. Two entities were created to manage the flow of cryptocurrency. One of these two entities is the state-owned company Crypto-Assets Treasury, which is responsible for issuing, collecting, and distributing crypto assets. The role of this company goes beyond controlling the flow of cryptocurrencies as it manages the digital monitoring of the blockchain as well. By issuing this decree, the regulation of cryptocurrencies within Venezuela became more manageable for the government, which now formally recognizes cryptocurrencies.  However, due to the decentralized nature of the blockchain technology powering cryptocurrencies, it is impossible for a government-issued digital currency to qualify as a cryptocurrency.[47] Hence, Venezuela’s cryptocurrency Petro, like CryptoRuble, can be read as a futile attempt to regulate the cryptocurrency market.

The case of China

China, the world’s second-largest economy, chose to ban crypto back in May 2021. However, this was done in several stages. Firstly, China prohibited any engagement of its financial institutions in crypto transactions. This was the biggest step towards banning the market as some of those institutions used crypto in trade and foreign investment. Then, all domestic crypto mining was banned. In a few months, cryptocurrencies were completely outlawed in September of 2021. China’s move against crypto was based on concerns of the effect of mining on the environment,[48] and the long-run effect that cryptocurrencies would have on the country’s economy. China recently created the digital Yuan, which is a virtual wallet that can be used within its borders, and the ban thus signals the government’s unwavering stance against cryptocurrency, implying that maintaining their authority over the Chinese market and social security is more important than appeasing emerging financial trends in China and beyond.

The case of El Salvador

On the opposite end of the spectrum, El Salvador fully embraced the cryptomania of 2021. On June 9th, 2021, the nation announced its decision to recognize Bitcoin as legal tender within its borders, making it the first country in the world to do so on September 7, 2021.[49] The decree allows Bitcoins to legally function as formal currency, and may be used for payments of goods and services, taxes, and even debts. El Salvador moved to recognize Bitcoin as legal tender despite warnings issued by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank that emphasize the difficulty of regulating the cryptomarket.[50] Through its adoption of Bitcoin, El Salvador hoped to increase efficiency in international remittances and reduce the share of underbanked people, as well as the nation’s reliance on the USD.[51] Yet, even as the government began enabling the immediate conversion of Bitcoins into USD, the USD continues to be used as the accounting standard in the nation, and it is not clear that Bitcoin improved banking efficiency. As of May 2022, Bitcoin fell 45% since its adoption in El Salvador, and the combined market value of all cryptocurrencies shrunk to less than half its November 2021 value.[52] The Salvadoran government lost one-third of the value of its holdings through this drop. Moreover, the nation’s debt increased from USD 19.8 billion at the end of 2019 to USD 24.4 billion at the end of 2021, yet its unpopular adoption of Bitcoin complicates its ability to cover the deficit with assistance from external bodies like the IMF.


The perceived threat of cryptocurrencies to governmental authority is not imagined but is largely mischaracterized. Cryptocurrencies are not championing the destruction of a world regime. While they are decentralized, they are not actually decentralizing the financial world order. This paper makes it clear that cryptocurrencies merely shift governance from nation states and their corresponding financial institutions and authorities to those with the largest crypto-holdings – namely large corporations and wealthy individual investors. Whether this poses a destabilizing threat to nations depends on the state of political affairs and economic vision of any individual government. Nations with more authoritative regimes tend to favor banning cryptocurrencies while nations that have legalized or considered fully legalizing cryptocurrencies largely did so out of despair. Meanwhile, those in the middle who are exploring different scopes of regulation tend to be democratic-leaning countries as they are walking a tight line between maintaining their governance and appeasing nascent technology and trends adopted by the masses.

Foe or friend, governments must come to terms with the prevalence of cryptocurrencies in order to protect their citizens from fraud, trafficking, and other crimes. This paper has demonstrated how it is the consumers who are mostly left vulnerable in the crypto market. Accordingly, governments have begun to seriously consider modes of regulating the market to mitigate risk to their citizens’ safety, which are manifest in heterogeneous policies. Some governments are completely open to the crypto market, some have conditions to regulate it, while others explicitly prohibit it. However, case studies presented from around the world indicate that effective governance representatives are likely to have a less restrictive regulatory stance towards cryptocurrencies.

Policy recommendations for each of the three scenarios will be presented to account for their nuances. In the first scenario, where countries allow the free flow of cryptocurrencies, policymakers should consider the illegal activities that crypto might circulate in such as financing terrorism or tax evasion. Thus, new regulations should be issued targeted towards commercial activities to restrain the use of crypto in illegal acts and endow the government with more stable control over the market. In the second scenario, where countries are still exploring their legislative options and/or do not have any regulations yet, it is recommended that they consider allowing firms and people to engage in transactions of cryptocurrency at their own risk. In the third case, with countries that choose to ban cryptocurrencies, a new approach can be taken by creating local cryptocurrencies that can be monitored by the governments, yet allowing countries to benefit from the circulation of crypto as it is a growing phenomenon.


[1] “Bitcoin BTC/USD Price History up until May 19, 2022,” Statista, May 19, 2022,

[2] Andrey I. Pestunov, “Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain: Potential Applications in Government and Business,” Problems of Economic Transition 62, no. 4-6 (2020),

[3] Charles C.Y. Wang, “Case Study: Should We Embrace Crypto?” Harvard Business Review, (November-December 2021),

[4] Ryan Farell, “An Analysis of the Cryptocurrency Industry,” Wharton Research Scholars 130 (2015),

[5] Mahadi Hasan Miraz, Mohammad Hasan, Mohammad Rekabder and Rahma Akhter, “Trust, Transaction Transparency, Volatility, Facilitating Condition, Performance Expectancy towards Cryptocurrency Adoption through Intention to Use,” Journal of Management Information and Decision Sciences 25, no. 1 (2022),

[6] Bank of International Settlements, “BIS International Banking Statistics and Global Liquidity Indicators at End-December 2021,” The Bank for International Settlements, April 28, 2022,

[7] Samanth Subramanian, “Crypto Is Now the World’s Fifth-Most Circulated Currency by Value,” Quartz, January 12, 2021,

[8] Satoshi Nakamoto, “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System,” (2008),

[9] Farhad Manjoo, “What Is Happening to the People Falling for Crypto and NFTs?” The New York Times, May 5, 2022,

[10] Ryan Farell, “An Analysis of the Cryptocurrency Industry,” Wharton Research Scholars 130 (2015),

[11] Kok Han Chan, Chiew Shi Min, Chong Jin Yuan, Foong Pui Yan and Lee Xua Zhen, “Acceptance of Cryptocurrency Among Ipoh Residents,” (Bachelor’s Thesis, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, 2018): 2,

[12] Susan Alkadri, “Defining and Regulating Cryptocurrency: Fake Internet Money or Legitimate Medium of Exchange?” Duke Law & Technology Review 17 (2018): 75,

[13] Ryan Farell, “An Analysis of the Cryptocurrency Industry,” Wharton Research Scholars 130 (2015),

[14]  Charles C.Y. Wang, “Case Study: Should We Embrace Crypto?” Harvard Business Review, (November-December 2021),

[15] “From Bitcoin to Stablecoins: The Cryptocurrency Boom,” Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, September 7, 2021,

[16] Megan DeMatteo, “Bitcoin Price History: 2009 to 2022,” TIME, May 23, 2022,

[17] The price of Bitcoin is generally affected by the competition with another cryptocurrency, the market’s demand, supply, and availability.

[18] Paulina Likos and Coryanne Hicks, “The History of Bitcoin, the First Cryptocurrency,” U.S. News,  February 4, 2022,

[19] Keith Speights, “3 Top Metaverse Cryptocurrencies: Are They Buys?” The Motley Fool,  February 17, 2022,

[20] “What Are Meme Coins?” Binance Academy, November 15, 2021,

[21] David Rodeck and Benjamin Curry, “An Introduction to Dogecoin, The Meme Cryptocurrency,” Forbes, April 8, 2022,

[22] Erin Ravenscraft, “What is the Metaverse, Exactly?” Wired. Condé Nast, 25 April 25, 2022.

[23] What Are Meme Coins?” Binance Academy, November 15, 2021,

[24]  Adam Hayes, “Meme Stock,” Investopedia, February 22, 2022,

[25] Yanis Varoufakis, “Why Bitcoin Is Not a Socialist’s Ally,” Yanis Varoufakis,  July 27, 2020,

[26] Farhad Manjoo, “What Is Happening to the People Falling for Crypto and NFTs,” New York Times, May 5, 2022,

[27] Nellie S. Huang, Adam Shell and Anne Kates Smith, “Roaring Twenties,” Kiplinger’s Personal Finance (2021): 26.

[28] Jordan Tuwiner, “Who Accepts Bitcoin? 11 Major Companies,” Buy Bitcoin Worldwide, April 11, 2022,

[29] Ryan Haar, “The Future of Cryptocurrency: 5 Experts’ Predictions after a ‘Breakthrough’ 2021,” TIME, April 18, 2022,

[30] Ben Schott, “Give Amazon and Facebook a Seat at the United Nations,” Bloomberg, October 3,  2021,

[31] Yanis Varoufakis, “Why Bitcoin Is Not a Socialist’s Ally,” Yanis Varoufakis,  July 27, 2020,

[32] Coinbase, “Terra Price,”

[33] Susan Alkadri, “Defining and Regulating Cryptocurrency: Fake Internet Money or Legitimate Medium of Exchange?” Duke Law & Technology Review 17 (2018): 75,

[34] Ibid.

[35] Mark E. Bokert and Alan Hahn, “Cryptocurrency Investing by Retirement Plans and IRAs,” Employee Relations Law Journal 47, no. 4 (Spring 2022),

[36] Ibid.

[37] Trautman, Lawrence, “Virtual Currencies Bitcoin and What Now after Liberty Reserve, Silk Road, and Mt. Gox,” Richmond Journal of Law & Technology 20, no. 4 (2014) pp. 2–5.

[38] Ryan Frebowitz, “Cryptocurrency and State Sovereignty,” (Thesis, Naval postgraduate school, 2018),

[39] Aaron van Wirdum, “Bolivian Authorities Arrest 60 ‘Cryptocurrency Promoters,’” Bitcoin Magazine, May 29, 2017, Web.

[40] Ryan Farell, “An Analysis of the Cryptocurrency Industry,” Wharton Research Scholars 130 (2015),

[41] Everette Jordan et al., “Risks and Vulnerabilities of Virtual Currency: Cryptocurrency as a Payment Method,” Public-Private Analytic Exchange Program, 2017,—2017-AEP_Risks-and-Vulnerabilities-of-Virtual-Currency.pdf.

[42] Andrey I. Pestunov, “Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain: Potential Applications in Government and Business,” Problems of Economic Transition 62, no. 4-6 (2020),

[43] Pouneh Almasi, Sarah E. Aberg, Reid Whitten, Fatema K. Merchant, and Yasamin Parsafar, “Crypto and Russia Sanctions: A Primer and Survival Guide for Crypto Companies,” The National Law Review XII, no. 168 (March 17, 2022),

[44] Mark Lurie and Peter Dittus. “How Western Sanctions on Russia Could Make Crypto an International Reserve Currency,” CoinDesk, April 28, 2022,

[45] Paul Mazzola and Mitchell Goroch, “Are Russia’s Elite Really Using Cryptocurrency to Evade Sanctions?” The Conversation, March 22, 2022,

[46] Elena Fabrichnaya and Alexander Marrow, “Russian Authorities Clash on Plans for Crypto Regulation,” Reuters, February 19, 2022,

[47] Mahadi Hasan Miraz, Mohammad Hasan, Mohammad Rekabder and Rahma Akhter, “Trust, Transaction Transparency, Volatility, Facilitating Condition, Performance Expectancy towards Cryptocurrency Adoption through Intention to Use,” Journal of Management Information and Decision Sciences 25, no. 1 (2022),

[48] Marco Quiroz-Gutierrez, “Crypto Is Fully Banned in China and 8 Other Countries,” Fortune, January 5, 2022,

[49] PWC, El Salvador’s Law: A Meaningful Test For Bitcoin, October 2020,

[50] Ibid.

[51] Ibid.

[52] “El Salvador Government Holdings Lose One-Third Value after Cryptocurrency Rout,” Alarabiya News, May 19, 2022,

Related Topics