You say - ' But ultimately in a multi-polar world the base layer will be neutral, India, Brazil, the Middle East, Norway, Japan, Indonesia, Malaysia, there are many power players who don't want to replace one bully with another, and to give China even more leverage.'

Now you assume a multipolar world and I agree that is possible. And that Bitcoin might be one of those poles.

However India is deeply tied to Russia and with Russia now deeply dependent upon China India has few options, especially with the rapid decline of western power and its long term reluctance to align with western imperialism.

The mostly authoritarian nations outside of the liberal western democracies are even less inclined to accept Bitcoin for MoE as they nearly all outright ban it for MoE use.

Yes there are potential pockets of resistance that could adopt Bitcoin but if that excluded them from Chinese protocols and trade that would be a cost few would want to accept.

'But ultimately in a multi-polar world the base layer will be neutral' There is no logical basis for this assumption- history strongly suggests it is not the case. While Bitcoin presents a potential new paradigm state power structures and imperatives argue in the opposite direction.

After all the network effect applies to monetary systems and because China now dominates trade in manufactured goods and commodities it can dictate terms and in fact must impose some sort of power projection beyond its borders to enable it to invest in and maintain control of global supply chains and infrastructures including institutional structures. China is the logical builder of new alternative trade payments protocols and it has already built them and they are already being used by a growing number of respondents.

Your assumption that Bitcoin, an apolitical algorithm will over ride the imperatives of global hegemony is an assumption ignoring history and logic. Bitcoin could in theory provide a fantastic basis for true free trade, but true free trade has never been the reality- trade has always been to a greater or lesser extent subservient to the dictates of dominant military and trading nations.

Just because Bitcoin delivers superior monetary functionality (in theory) to the individual does not mean it does the same for the nation state- it doesn't! The nation state is still a major factor, perhaps the most important factor in the wealth of nations.

The wealth and dominance of the US owes at least as much to its legacy domination of global protocols and institutions as it does to 'free trade'. The US has been far from an exponent of free trade but rather increasingly dependent upon exercising its domination of trade payments and military power projection. Now that US economy is increasingly mired in debt the viability of its empire is declining and Chinas is rising.

Bitcoin may be a useful neutral outlier/safe haven, but looks unlikely to gain the critical mass and widespread MoE acceptance required to be anything more than an outlier to Chinas growing dominance. Speculating upon the worth of potential Bitcoin derivatives without accepting and incorporating context in the real world is fruitless.

You say- 'you took over this thread about tokenisation to rant on a soapbox'. I say I am just providing real world and historical context that is lacking in your analysis.