A recent post showed the distribution of btc hash power globally, and one of the comments on that post suggested that the amount of hashpower in China, despite that country's anti-btc policies, was evidence for btc's unstoppability. (This current post was originally a reply to that comment but grew in scope enough that I'm hoping it might kick off a broader discussion.)

I've repeatedly heard arguments along the lines of China couldn't even ban btc, look how futile it is, therefore btc has achieved escape velocity and my reaction is always bafflement. Do people really not remember the twentieth century? Do people not remember what happens when a nation-state is fully motivated and believes its survival to be at stake?

The patty cake of the modern era, with government's public and theatrical concern for people's feelings and rights, is not the historical norm. Getting wound around the axle with endless debates about whether it's actually okay to arrest people for stealing is a historical aberration. When powerful groups are really motivated, the gloves come off. And so, are we comfortable in saying that China has really wanted to stop btc? Or has it only wanted to stop certain people from using it for capital flight, but certain other people, perhaps regime-insiders, get a free pass?

I'm not nitpicking. There's a big difference between a country motivated by survival and one putting on a public spectacle to justify other actions.

For my part, I posit that we have not yet seen a world where nation-states view btc as a serious threat; and once we move into that phase, we will see, in earnest, how effectual they can be when they want to be -- it will be the era of internments, of massive violation of rights, of propaganda, of night-time door knockings. The 'opposition' that we've seen thus far will look like a child's tea party when this new wave comes. Btc may even still not be stopped, but as Kevin Kelly showed, there's a lot of wiggle room in what it means to stop something.

This is, of course, a hypothesis. I could be wrong, and hope I am. But I welcome other perspectives.