Bitcoin is not only a religion; it is a philosophy. Yes, Bitcoin is both an innovation and an economic messiah as shown in my previous article. Similar to every religion, Bitcoin should be mindful of its revolution. As an asset backed by faith, Bitcoin is an envy of conventional financial systems.

In this article, I will discuss Bitcoin and politics; its consequences, and the way out. I will answer some fundamental questions about Bitcoin and politics; whether politics is good for Bitcoin or Bitcoin is best a political apartheid.

To explore the various dimensions; consequences and benefits of Bitcoin in its newfound political alliances, I will assume two personalities to Bitcoin maximalists; the soothsayer to Caesar and Jesus to his disciples. The aftermath of the soothsayer’s warning to Caesar and Jesus’ warning to his disciples did come with severe punishment when the recipients deferred it.

As the soothsayer to Caesar, I will say; Bitcoin Beware the Ides of March. If I were Jesus, I would say, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.

Today, my strongest postulation to Bitcoin maximalists is,

Bitcoin, remember; the things that giveth life killeth; Political entanglement is a stepping stone to fiat but for Bitcoin, an asset-backed by faith, it could be Bitcoin’s first sin.

Why Bitcoin Should be Mindful of Politics

Centralization of Control

The specter of centralized oversight looms large over Bitcoin. It threatens to erode the decentralized tenant of Bitcoin. The very creed of Bitcoin is the gospel of decentralization—a sanctuary from centralized authorities. Any association with political power threatens to fundamentally betray these ideals.

If Bitcoin intertwines with politics, it risks ceding significant control to governmental authorities which inevitably dilutes the very essence of decentralization upon which it was founded. The encroachment of political power not only undermines Bitcoin’s original vision but also poses practical dangers to its decentralized ethos.

To illustrate this, let me draw upon the allegory of the Pied Piper of Hamelin. In the early 1300s, the Piper was commissioned to rid the town of rats but, after being denied payment, retaliated by leading the children away. This story serves as a stark reminder of the precarious balance of authority and autonomy, showing the peril of relying on those who control the purse strings.

Just as the Pied Piper wielded power when payment was withheld, governments could similarly usurp control over Bitcoin if it becomes entangled with political interests.

Excessive Regulations that Chains Innovation

Political entanglements inevitably bring excessive regulatory oversight. Ideally, Bitcoin’s innovation thrives best in a free state, and regulation could pose the danger of stifling Bitcoin's innovation and egalitarian mission.

Should Bitocin keep dancing with politicians as in the just concluded Bitcoin Conference where Former President Donard Trump and other POTUS contestants were present? It could lead to several biases and possibly impose several adverse since it is seen as a political tool.

Bitcoin could be seized to fight the wrong people. The government could forge vindictive regulations that would harm Bitcoin in the long run. Therefore, middling in politics could cause the death of Bitcoin as governments’ desire to rein in Bitcoin's volatility or enforce stringent security measures might impose rigid constraints and as such diminish the creativity and freedom that allowed it to thrive.

Alienation of Users: The Divide of Ideologies

One of the successes of the cultlike nature of Bitcoin. Through the cult of Bitcoin, the disciples of Satoshish, Bitcoiners became a global, diverse collective of individuals unified by a shared belief in decentralization and financial freedom. These guys sing the “not your keys, not your coin” mantra as their affirmation that decentralization is their highest oath.

By looking at the growth, you can see the community is one and politics could act as the shepherd killer whose aim is the sheep but targets the shepherd so the sheep scatters.

No double, the entanglement of Bitcoin in politics would inevitably introduce ideological rifts. Regrettably, political affiliations in the space could fracture Bitcoin’s user base. It alienates those who see Bitcoin as a haven from government control and divides the community into factions with conflicting visions for the future of the cryptocurrency.

As a reminder, let me remind you of the Protestant Reformation and how it could be the story of Bitcoin, should it keep dancing disco with politics. The Christian Church, once unified under a single banner, splintered into multiple sects with divergent ideologies. However, Martin Luther's Ninety-Five Theses which initially intended to reform the Church, sparked a schism that led to centuries of religious conflict.

Similarly, political interference in Bitcoin’s ecosystem could create deep ideological divisions that could alienate the user base and undermine the solidarity that makes Bitcoin so powerful.

Dilution of Core Values: The Compromise of Principles

Bitcoin's entanglement with politics could force it to align with government regulations or political demands. First, it will exchange the keys of decentralization with centralized government control, and autonomy and open the identity warehouse of Bitcoin users as it is currently doing with KYCs and AML, thanks to government control.

These compromises may gradually dilute the principles that once made Bitcoin revolutionary and transform it from a voluntary financial system into yet another communist or capitalist beholden, carved by the powers that be.

To better understand how political interference in Bitcoin could dilute its core value, let me provide a fitting analogy with the ancient Roman Empire. Little wonder, the Roman empire, once a republic founded on democratic principles and civic virtue abandoned its core values as political and military pressures grew and felled for corruption and decay when it gave way to dictatorship.

Bitcoin, like Rome, must be vigilant in safeguarding its founding ideals. If it yields to political pressure, it risks diluting the chief priest, Satoshi’s revolutionary ideas that made it a beacon of financial freedom.

The Path to Redemption

First, you must not mistake me for saying that Bitcoin is inherently anti-government. I have always agreed that Bitcoin is neutral; Bitcoin is a voluntary system—neither capitalist nor communist, but purely voluntary.  As a voluntary system, it is neither designed to serve governments nor against the government, but rather to empower the people.

As you might know, politics distorts and undermines the very fabric of voluntary systems. Like the scorpion, when politics stench a decentralized system like Bitcoin, it imposes power structures that erode the autonomy of users and of course, render volunteerism useless in its purest form.

As I reflect on the marriage of Bitcoin and politics, the biblical story of Jesus’ temptation comes to mind. The events in the wilderness seem similar to the current struggle of Bitcoin and Politics. For Bitcoin, it was touted as a currency of cyberpunks and illicit.

Suddenly, why is Bitcoin taking center stage in parliaments, congresses, and elections? Like Bitcoin, after fasting for forty days and forty nights, Jesus was tempted by Satan, who offered him all the kingdoms of the world in exchange for bowing to him.

Today, Bitcoin is being offered juicy positions like the SEC chairman, and many others as promised by Donald Trump during the Bitcoin Conference in Nashville. In Jesus’ story, he conquered.  The question is, should Bitcoin fall for it and is politics good for Bitcoin or a trap?

For me, I would say;

If Bitcoin must stay true to its original mission of decentralization, transparency, anonymity, and a glorious future, it must win the temptation of political entanglement.

There is no doubt that Politics offers Bitcoin a seductive deal such as access to legitimacy, wider acceptance, and perhaps even governmental favor. But just as with Jesus’ test, the cost of accepting that deal is the betrayal of foundational principles—decentralization, autonomy, and the protection of individual rights.

Therefore, the path to Bitcoin redemption in its marriage with politics could best be described with a Nigerian slogan “kwechiri,” which simply means “not to agree.” Most importantly, action they say speaks louder than voice, inventors like Rootstock should continue building trustless, autonomous, decentralized, and cutting-edge systems that help the Bitcoin community become self-sufficient.