In the Journal of Democracy, Alex Gladstein argues that Bitcoin has become “freedom money” for activists worldwide, offering a lifeline against authoritarian financial repression. He cites examples from Russia, Togo, Afghanistan, Cuba, and Nigeria, where traditional banking either collapses under state pressure or deliberately excludes dissenters. “Bank accounts are political, and can be turned on and off by the powers that be,” notes Gladstein, underscoring why dissidents increasingly rely on Bitcoin’s censorship resistance and global reach. The piece highlights Bitcoin’s practical role in supporting underground education, protest movements, and remittances where dollars cannot flow. Gladstein warns that central bank digital currencies could entrench surveillance, but sees Bitcoin adoption among activists as mirroring the rise of encrypted messaging. He predicts that by 2030 Bitcoin could be a standard tool for democracy movements, a “peaceful global protest” reshaping financial freedom.
-EDITOR·OP_DAILY SHARE TO X
Stephen Feldstein, a senior fellow at Carnegie’s Democracy, Conflict, and Governance program, warned that authoritarian regimes are rapidly adopting what he calls “repression technology”—a blend of surveillance, censorship, disinformation, and internet shutdowns. Feldstein described the sector as “progressing fast” with tools becoming cheaper and more widely deployed, from spyware to biometric ID-linked banking. He cited Nepal’s recent collapse of government authority, where blunt internet shutdowns backfired, in contrast with China’s subtle, coordinated system of surveillance and content shaping. Feldstein also highlighted financial repression, pointing to Vietnam’s new biometric-linked banking controls and China’s social credit system, stressing how debanking complements speech suppression. Protesters, however, are adapting: in Nepal, they turned to encrypted apps, Discord, and even digital assets. Feldstein sees risk in AI-powered predictive policing but remains hopeful, arguing “the future isn’t written” and that democratic societies still have opportunities to build safeguards.
-EDITOR·OP_DAILY SHARE TO X
A new report from Checkonchain and Unchained, The Bitcoin Checkpoint, argues that the digital asset market has entered a fundamentally new phase, shaped by institutional flows, ETF dominance, and increasingly sophisticated derivatives. “Bitcoin is undeniably a global macro asset, and now everybody knows it,” the authors write, noting the slow, steady ascent of prices with historically shallow drawdowns and low volatility. Long-term holders still control more than half of invested wealth, even after distributing tens of billions in BTC monthly, while over a third of supply now sits above a $75,000 cost basis. ETF launches in 2024 marked a structural milestone, with IBIT capturing nearly 58% of AUM, closely tied to the explosion of options markets now exceeding $90 billion in open interest. The report concludes that “market structure has changed forever,” with chopsolidation periods strengthening conviction and liquidity deep enough to absorb multi-billion-dollar flows. Analysts expect Bitcoin’s trillion-dollar milestones to multiply, with volatility shocks testing confidence at higher price altitudes.
-EDITOR·OP_DAILY SHARE TO X
Bespoke Group founder Matt McClintock, addresses recurring fears that the U.S. government might confiscate Bitcoin as it did gold in the 1930s. He argues that the comparison is “a tortured interpretation of history,” noting that gold then backed the dollar, whereas Bitcoin does not underpin today’s fiat system. While the U.S. government now holds a believed 198,000 BTC from criminal seizures and is considering legislation to create a “Strategic Bitcoin Reserve,” McClintock stresses this reflects institutional recognition, not confiscatory intent. He concedes that seized Bitcoin will be held, not sold, but emphasizes that Bitcoin’s decentralized design and fixed supply make it “inherently beyond government control.” Looking ahead, proposed laws such as the BITCOIN Act could even normalize sovereign accumulation. McClintock concludes that, barring criminal prosecution, fears of state confiscation are largely unfounded in the modern monetary context.
-EDITOR·OP_DAILY SHARE TO X
