Everyone loves to talk about “Bitcoin governance,” but here’s the uncomfortable truth: governance in Bitcoin isn't about making the smartest or most efficient decisions it’s about preserving the messy, decentralized freedom that makes censorship impossible.
If you think Bitcoin can be both tightly optimized and remain censorship-resistant, history says otherwise. Every human system that traded individual autonomy for “better coordination” eventually got captured. Whether it was the printing press under licensing laws, radio under state control, or the internet under corporate platforms — the story repeats.
Free users and free software are not abstract ideals. They’re the only reason anyone can still transact on Bitcoin without permission. Strip away one, and you don’t get a slightly weaker Bitcoin — you get no Bitcoin at all, just a glorified database waiting to be censored.
The irony? The real threat isn’t governments. It’s us — developers, businesses, influencers — pushing for changes that make nodes harder to run, transactions easier to filter, or governance more “streamlined.” Convenience is the Trojan horse.
The question isn’t “who gets to decide for the network?”
It’s: “what must we refuse to compromise, even if it slows us down, costs more, or looks inefficient?”
If you can’t answer that, you can’t protect Bitcoin.
It’s: “what must we refuse to compromise, even if it slows us down, costs more, or looks inefficient?”