How Political Resistance Crushed Facebook’s Libra Vision for Global Payments

by

As a seasoned researcher with a keen interest in the intersection of technology, finance, and politics, I find David Marcus’s account of Facebook’s Libra’s downfall both enlightening and concerning. The revelation that political forces played a decisive role in its demise, rather than legal or regulatory issues, sheds light on a broader trend of politically motivated financial restrictions that seems to be increasingly prevalent, not just within the cryptocurrency and tech sectors, but across various industries.

David Marcus, previously at the helm of Facebook’s Libra digital currency venture, has shared insights into why the project ultimately faced setbacks.

Based on Marcus’s explanation, intense political pressure and the withdrawal of supportive institutions played a crucial role in stopping the project, even though it had a strong design and underwent extensive consultations with regulators.

How Facebook’s Libra Was ‘Politically Killed’

On November 30th, Marcus shared a post (previously on Twitter) outlining the series of occurrences that ultimately resulted in the downfall of Libra. Initially known as a blockchain-based payment system, later renamed Diem, its objective was to transform international transactions by combining a robust blockchain with a stablecoin, aiming for innovation in global payments.

Yet, Marcus pointed out that the problem wasn’t primarily linked to legal or governmental problems. On the contrary, political powers appeared to have been the key influencers in this case.

It’s important to note a key aspect: The project had no remaining legal or regulatory issues that could have halted it. Instead, it appears to have been terminated for political reasons, with the involved government and regulators exerting pressure on banks to back out through intimidation.

Marcus explained that Libra encountered strong opposition right from its announcement in 2019. Despite modifying their approach to address concerns and pushing back the project’s release until 2021, they continued to face persistent political resistance. He pointed out a significant moment when it was reported that Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell changed his position following a meeting with former Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen.

It came out that Yellen stated backing Libra would be akin to political self-destruction, which led the Federal Reserve to caution banks participating in the project. On these conference calls, it was said that the Federal Reserve’s legal counsel advised banks against furthering Libra, expressing unease about the initiative.

“You have the freedom to proceed and launch your plans, but we express our discomfort with you doing so.” And with those words, the matter was concluded.

Supporters within the cryptocurrency sector have since endorsed Marcus’s explanation. Kathryn Haun, a previous member of the Libra board, along with Tyler Winklevoss, co-creator of Gemini, emphasized that political agendas were primarily responsible for the halt in the development of Libra.

In partnership with David and his colleagues at Meta, Gemini played a crucial role in preparing for the unveiling of Libra (previously known as Diem). We were just about to cross the finish line when federal regulations unexpectedly halted this project. According to Winklevoss, it was more about politics than legal grounds that led to its demise.

After going through this situation, Marcus underscored the importance of decentralization when designing tomorrow’s financial architectures. He advocated for Bitcoin as a potential base for these structures due to its unbiased nature and robust, tamper-resistant construction.

If your goal is to establish a global monetary network that can handle trillions of dollars daily and endure for the next century, it’s crucial to construct it on the most impartial, distributed, and tamper-resistant platform, and there’s no doubt that Bitcoin serves this purpose perfectly.

Marcus’s revelations add to growing scrutiny over “debanking” within the cryptocurrency and tech sectors. Recent allegations of politically motivated financial restrictions have sparked further conversations about the intersection of regulation, politics, and innovation in the United States.

Read More

2024-12-02 02:25