Post by Bitcoin Dictionary

Think about the inversion for a moment.

I am the one who has been villainised for defending the individual—for insisting that Bitcoin must have a fixed protocol so that no developer, corporation, exchange or foundation can seize control of it.

I put tens of millions of my own family’s money into that fight. I threw everything at building the technology, restoring the protocol and releasing the tools. I dealt with compromised systems, intrusions, litigation and years of organised public hostility.

Then look at what stood against me.

COPA was backed by interests connected to Meta, Jack Dorsey, Coinbase and some of the largest corporate players in the world—organisations collectively representing trillions of dollars in capital and influence.

Yet many of you convinced yourselves that they represented the small individual, while I represented centralised control.

Think about that.

I argued for rules that even I could not change. They defended a system directed by a small group of developers and supported by exchanges, custodians and corporate infrastructure.

I argued that anyone should be able to build, compete and accept payment. They supported restrictions that pushed ordinary users back towards middlemen.

You were told that concentrated corporate power was decentralisation, while the person demanding a protocol beyond anyone’s control was the villain.

If you genuinely care about the small individual, stop repeating the branding and examine the structure of power.