Title: "Ethereum's Vitalik Buterin Critiques El Salvador's Bitcoin Law: What Did He Discover?"

Written by: Eduardo Próspero
Translated by: Blockchain Knight

Recently, Vitalik Buterin commented on El Salvador's Bitcoin law. An anonymous user posted an unpopular opinion on Reddit: El Salvador's President Nayib Bukele should not be praised by the crypto community. The founder of Ethereum responded to this issue: El Salvador's Bitcoin law is malicious for everyone involved. Is Vitalik's viewpoint correct or biased? We present some facts for your reference in this article.

First, Vitalik stated: "This viewpoint is correct. Forcing businesses to accept a specific cryptocurrency is contrary to the ideals of freedom, which is so important in the crypto space. Moreover, the strategy of pushing Bitcoin onto millions of users in El Salvador without prior education is reckless and could expose many innocent people to hacking or fraud. It is shameful for those who uncritically praise him (well, I will name the main culprits: the extremists of Bitcoin are truly shameful)."

Let's discuss his claims one by one.

Does El Salvador's Bitcoin Law "Contradict the Ideals of Freedom in the Crypto Space"?

Has Vitalik thought this through? He specifically mentioned the controversial Article 7 of El Salvador's Bitcoin law. This point has already been discussed in the Bitcoin community four months ago.

The law states: "Article 7: Whenever a user pays in Bitcoin to a merchant, every person providing goods or services must accept it as a payment method."

This sounds alarming. However, let's tentatively trust President Bukele. Four months ago, Bukele explained the intent of the law with an example.

"Article 7 actually protects users," Bukele said. It applies to those without bank accounts, credit cards, or debit cards, 70% of whom are outside the financial system.

"Imagine these people working in El Zonte or other places within the Bitcoin ecosystem. Then they go to a pharmacy to buy medicine. Without Article 7, the pharmacy could refuse. This would be discrimination against the 70% you want to benefit. They have no other payment method. They must be able to purchase medicine or food."

People may disagree with Nayib Bukele's viewpoint or question his intentions. But it is undeniable that there are positive motives behind Article 7. This becomes particularly evident when we consider Article 8, which leads us to Vitalik's next point, that Salvadorans lack education regarding Bitcoin.

Is El Salvador Promoting Bitcoin "With Almost No User Education"?

Do you think Vitalik is unaware that El Salvador held a pilot project adopting Bitcoin in El Zonte, also known as Bitcoin Beach? Or is he just playing dumb? There is evidence that the pilot project in El Salvador has made significant and ongoing efforts in education. A simple internet search reveals that the Bitcoin community has produced a wealth of educational materials; does it not count as education just because it is not government-sponsored?

"Article 8: Without affecting the private sector, the state shall provide alternative methods for users to access the Bitcoin transaction system and, when users are willing, automatically and instantly convert Bitcoin to USD. Furthermore, the state must promote the necessary training and mechanisms to enable the public to access the Bitcoin transaction system."

This clause guarantees the convertibility between Bitcoin and USD. The Chivo wallet includes this feature. The law also contains El Salvador's commitment: "The state will promote the necessary training." A month ago, Bitcoinist (this site) aired the government's first television advertisement explaining Bitcoin and the Chivo wallet. Of course, they could have done better, but indeed, they have made educational efforts before the law took effect.

Is Vitalik Ignoring All of This?

Is Vitalik right? Should Bitcoin extremists uncritically praise President Bukele?

The relationship between Vitalik and Bitcoin extremists is contentious. They are at odds, with both camps often attacking each other. However, what he says may not be entirely true.

Here’s a comment from Bitcoin extremist Alex Gladstein about Vitalik: "Is Vitalik willing to elaborate on Bukele's human rights violations? That is the real concern, not whether his Bitcoin law might benefit Salvadoran users."

Tim Swanson pointed out, "Don't finger-point at President Bukele of El Salvador. Why do advocates of Bitcoin need to remain silent or even defensive about President Bukele?"

In the Article 7 bill published four months ago, we quoted Nic Carter's article "El Salvador Doesn't Need Bitcoin Mandates."

For critics led by George Selgin, this amounts to a mandate for 'forced tender' that goes far beyond a purely legal tender law, which should declare a currency medium as acceptable but not mandatory for exchange.

Bitcoin Magazine also published "The Dilemma of Bitcoin as Legal Tender."

"There is something in the law—mandating that vendors accept Bitcoin—that contradicts the spirit of Bitcoin's voluntary 'choice.' However, many may overlook some key features of this law, which protects vendors from the risks of holding unstable assets while maintaining the benefits of using Bitcoin in transactions."

Andreas Antonopoulos himself is not a Bitcoin extremist but has criticized Article 7 since day one.

What Else Did Vitalik Say?

In the introduction of this article, we posed the question: "Is Vitalik's viewpoint correct or biased?" His second comment in the Reddit post may clarify this doubt.

Vitalik pointed out, "President Bukele promotes Bitcoin because he buys it at a cheaper price and knows that a country adopting crypto will make him rich enough on its own."

Vitalik indicated: "A simpler, more foolish assumption: whether for political reasons or because he, like the rest of us, is a person, he just likes to be praised by those he perceives as powerful, namely Americans. Extremists are an easy group to please: you just have to stand in a position of power and say or do something nice for them and Bitcoin."

"Being praised by those he perceives as powerful. Namely Americans." This is a foolish assumption. The statement carries a degree of racism and greatly offends the people of El Salvador. Vitalik is one of the founders of Bitcoin Magazine. He knows that Bitcoin is the hardest money to create in history. His remarks at this moment are filled with bias.

In 2017, all ICOs were running on Ethereum, and his statement about "many innocent people being attacked or deceived" seems quite ironic.

Objectively speaking, we should view El Salvador's adoption and promotion of Bitcoin dialectically.

Source link: bitcoinist.com