The Power Game Behind Stablecoins: When the ‘Crypto Revolution’ Bowed to Regulation
Remember when cryptocurrencies were hailed as ‘revolutionaries set to change traditional finance’? By 2025, these once ‘bank-bashing rebels’ were lining up to apply for licenses from the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). What a plot twist—from ‘move fast and break things’ to ‘move fast and comply with regulations,’ how did crypto end up here?
From ‘Mysterious Tokens’ to ‘Regulatory Regulars’: The Absurdity of the GENIUS Act
This year, the GENIUS Act became law, pulling stablecoins out of the ‘gray area.’ Who can issue them, who regulates them, how they work—every detail is spelled out. Crypto insiders cheered it as ‘a victory for mainstream adoption,’ while U.S. Treasury officials claimed it ‘strengthens the dollar’s dominance.’ But let’s be real: Is this what crypto originally wanted?
Crypto was supposed to be ‘a trustless alternative to traditional finance’—no banks, no middlemen, peer-to-peer transactions. Now? You send stablecoins on-chain, but through a VC-backed app, settling with licensed issuers, and those issuers still answer to JPMorgan. The so-called ‘future of finance’ is just ‘old banking with a new app’—plus a stack of regulatory paperwork.
Even more ironic is the banks’ ‘little trick.’ Stablecoins once terrified banks—worried depositors would pull trillions out of savings to buy ‘full-reserve, interest-free’ digital tokens. The GENIUS Act solved that by decreeing: Stablecoin issuers are strictly forbidden from paying any interest to holders. It was like handing banks a ‘get out of jail free card’: ‘Don’t worry, your deposits are safe!’
The Compliance ‘Leash’: Want to Use Blockchain? Pass These 6 Hurdles
The Act wrapped stablecoins in regulatory chains堪比 a ‘Rube Goldberg machine’ (a ridiculously complex device for simple tasks). Want to use revolutionary blockchain tech? Sure—but first:
1. Get OCC approval;
2. Hold U.S. Treasuries at a 1:1 reserve ratio;
3. Submit monthly certifications signed by the CEO and CFO;
4. Let authorities freeze tokens on command;
5. Swear never to pay interest;
6. Limit business to ‘issuing and redeeming stablecoins’ (no extra innovation allowed).
‘Good kids’ like Circle are celebrating—they were already mostly compliant, now watching less regulated rivals get pushed out. Tether, though, faces a choice: Get transparent by 2028, or get banned from U.S. exchanges. For a company built on opacity and offshore banking (with a $162 billion market cap, bigger than Goldman Sachs), this is like asking a vampire to work day shifts.
The Hidden ‘Dollar Trap’: If Stablecoins Boom, Watch U.S. Treasuries
Why do merchants love stablecoins? Visa and Mastercard charge 2-3% per transaction (often a business’s second-biggest cost after payroll). Stablecoins cost pennies per transfer, with large settlements under 0.1%—no banks or card networks taking a cut. No wonder Amazon and Walmart are interested: Why pay the duopoly when you can send digital dollars directly?
But here’s the untalked-about risk: If stablecoins hit trillions in circulation, a huge chunk of U.S. Treasury demand will come from stablecoin reserves. But stablecoin demand is far ’emotionally driven’ than traditional buyers—panic redemptions could flood the market with Treasuries overnight. Then, U.S borrowing costs might depend on crypto Twitter’s mood that day…
From ‘Anarchist Money’ to ‘Institutional Cash Cow’: Crypto’s ‘Coming of Age’?
Bitcoin was meant to be ‘peer-to-peer electronic cash without third parties.’ Now federal law says: Digital dollars can only be issued by heavily regulated institutions. Every ‘decentralized stablecoin’ must have a ‘centralized kill switch’—the ‘censorship-resistant’ dream has become ‘mandatory censorship.’
But let’s face it: 99.9% of people don’t care about ‘decentralization ideals’—they just want fast, cheap transfers.Banks get this—JPMorgan, Bank of America, and Citi are all gearing up to offer stablecoin services. The institutions crypto was supposed to change are now the biggest winners of regulatory legitimacy.
Epilogue: A Tamed Revolution, or Smart Evolution?
The crypto ‘revolution’ didn’t burn down the system—it sat down at the negotiating table. Some call it ‘betrayal of ideals’; others say it’s ‘inevitable maturity’—like how the 19th-century free banking era evolved into the Federal Reserve.
The GENIUS Act may not be what crypto pioneers wanted, but it might be the most practical ‘coming of age.’ After all, being used and surviving beats shouting slogans in a niche bubble.
Ridiculous? Maybe. But you have to admit—it’s pretty ‘genius.’
This content is AI-generated and does not constitute investment advice. Please exercise your own rational judgment.
- Startup Commentary”WeChat never expected the little blue bag to be used like this!”
- Startup Commentary”Why Won’t Hainan Free Trade Port Replace Hong Kong, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and Shenzhen?”
- Chain Exploration”Unveiling the Two Key Figures Behind ETH’s Recent Sharp Rise: Tom Lee VS Joseph Rubin”
- Founder’s Q&A “The 3,600-yuan Childcare Subsidy Is Just the Beginning: Three Hidden Gold Mines for Maternal and Infant Entrepreneurship in 2025”
- Startup Commentary”The Post-VC Era of Game Entrepreneurship”
