BTC and ETH Are Not Decentralized—They’re Just Early-Stage Empires
By Dr. Pooyan Ghamari, Swiss Economist and Visionary
Cryptocurrency was envisioned as the great equalizer—a decentralized force to free individuals from centralized banking systems and state-backed monetary controls. But today, the harsh truth is clear: Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH), the two flagship projects of the crypto space, are not decentralized utopias. They are early-stage empires, consolidating influence and authority in ways not unlike the very systems they sought to disrupt.
The Myth of Decentralization
Bitcoin is often hailed as the “people’s money,” immune to manipulation. Ethereum, on the other hand, is praised for its smart contracts and decentralized applications. Yet, if we strip away the ideology and look at the mechanics, both ecosystems display centralizing tendencies.
Mining power in Bitcoin is concentrated among a handful of pools. Protocol changes and upgrades are decided not by the masses but by influential developers and stakeholders. Similarly, Ethereum’s roadmap—whether proof-of-stake transition, scaling decisions, or ecosystem priorities—is effectively dictated by a small circle of insiders.
This is not decentralization. It is governance by oligarchy, wrapped in the rhetoric of freedom.
Early Empires in the Digital Realm
Just as empires throughout history began with ideals of liberation only to consolidate power, BTC and ETH now exhibit the same trajectory.
-
Bitcoin: Its narrative of digital gold has centralized around dominant miners, custodial exchanges, and financial institutions who now shape its liquidity and influence.
-
Ethereum: Its innovation has birthed vast ecosystems, but with it comes reliance on validators, staking whales, and development elites who can set the rules of the game.
These dynamics resemble the rise of early empires—starting with rebellion, expanding through innovation, and eventually building hierarchies that echo the structures they fought against.
The Cost of Empire-Building
The transformation of BTC and ETH into digital empires has profound implications:
-
Centralized pressure points: A small group of actors can be targeted, regulated, or compromised.
-
Loss of sovereignty: Users increasingly rely on custodians, exchanges, and intermediaries—contradicting the original peer-to-peer ethos.
-
Barriers to innovation: Smaller, more radical projects are overshadowed by the gravitational pull of these giants, reducing diversity in the ecosystem.
Beyond BTC and ETH
Acknowledging these realities is not defeatism—it is clarity. BTC and ETH have laid the groundwork, but they are no longer the destination. True decentralization requires us to look beyond the empires of today and support the protocols, tools, and communities that resist consolidation.
The future of crypto should not mirror the empire-building tendencies of the past. Instead, it must remain loyal to the principle of autonomy, privacy, and the diffusion of power across networks, not within them.
A Call to Build
BTC and ETH are milestones, not endpoints. They are early-stage empires that may still play a role in legitimizing digital assets on the world stage, but they cannot represent the final vision of decentralization.
It is up to builders, coders, and communities to reclaim the mission. If the crypto movement is to remain true to its spirit, it must break free of empires and return to its roots: a distributed, borderless, and incorruptible system of value exchange.
Only then will the ideals of decentralization evolve from promise to reality.