Crypto Monarchy: When Mining Pools Became the New Kings
By Dr. Pooyan Ghamari, Swiss Economist and Visionary
The birth of cryptocurrency was envisioned as a rebellion against centralized authority—a digital uprising that promised equality, transparency, and empowerment for all participants. Bitcoin’s whitepaper laid out a system where no single entity could dominate, where trust was replaced by mathematics, and where the individual had as much right to validation as any institution. Yet history has shown us that even revolutions produce kings.
The Rise of the Mining Aristocracy
In the early days, mining was accessible to enthusiasts with modest hardware and electricity. Decentralization was tangible—miners were scattered across the globe, bound only by code and curiosity. But as the system matured, the economics of mining shifted. Energy costs soared, hardware requirements intensified, and efficiency became the currency of survival.
The result was inevitable: mining pools emerged, consolidating resources and computational power. What began as a cooperative tool to smooth earnings soon evolved into a concentration of influence. A handful of pools now control the lion’s share of mining activity, transforming the decentralized dream into a new hierarchy.
From Peer-to-Peer to Lords and Vassals
This concentration of power mirrors the structure of medieval monarchy. The mining pools sit as lords—deciding which transactions to prioritize, wielding disproportionate influence over network security, and in some cases, holding enough power to threaten the integrity of the chain itself.
Individual miners, once sovereign actors, are reduced to vassals, pledging allegiance to a pool in exchange for predictable rewards. Their autonomy is traded for stability, just as peasants once traded independence for the protection of kings.
The Illusion of Decentralization
To outsiders, blockchain still markets itself as decentralized. Yet the reality is more complex. When five or six entities collectively control the majority of hash power, the line between decentralization and oligopoly blurs. While it may not resemble the centralized control of governments or corporations, it reflects a new form of monarchy—unwritten, unelected, but undeniably powerful.
This raises an uncomfortable question: if decentralization can give rise to concentrated power, what distinguishes it from the very systems it sought to escape?
Disobedience as a Counterforce
As in any monarchy, power does not dissolve on its own—it must be challenged. Forks, alternative consensus models, and the development of energy-efficient validation mechanisms like proof-of-stake represent modern forms of disobedience. They disrupt the monopolistic tendencies of mining pools and redistribute influence across new landscapes.
But these innovations, too, risk birthing their own monarchies. Proof-of-stake, for instance, has already shown signs of centralization, where the wealthiest participants wield outsized influence. The cycle continues unless vigilance and resistance remain constant.
A Lesson in Human Nature
The story of mining pools reminds us that technology alone cannot erase human patterns of power. Systems evolve, incentives shift, and hierarchies emerge—even in networks designed to prevent them. The challenge, therefore, is not to seek an absolute end to concentration, but to create mechanisms that continually disrupt it.
Crowning the Future
Crypto’s monarchy is not absolute, but it is real. Mining pools may wear the crown today, but the crown is fragile. Innovation, disobedience, and community resolve are the forces that can dethrone kings and restore balance to decentralized ideals.
If decentralization is to remain more than a myth, it must be defended as a living principle—one that resists both old empires and new monarchies forged in the glow of digital power.