Two weeks ago I attended the Democratic National Convention. The main reason I did so was to try to foster impartiality in our coverage of politics as it relates to the election and bitcoin here at bitcoin Magazine. Earlier this year, we were invited to the Republican National Convention at the last minute, after David Bailey began coordinating with the Trump campaign ahead of his speech at the bitcoin 2024 conference in Nashville in July.
I was upset to see people associated with this company taking such a one-sided stance towards the Republican Party, even though in fact many more Republican politicians support bitcoin compared to Democrats. The Republican Party even formally integrated bitcoin into its public policy platform at the convention. The Democrats have not.
That’s not to say that no Democrats support bitcoin. Nationally, Rep. Ro Khanna of California, Ritchie Torres of New York, and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, also of New York, have all been outspoken bitcoin supporters in Congress. These politicians exist, they are outspoken, but they don’t seem to have the same resonance with the rest of the party or its voter base that exists in the Republican Party.
On the first day I attended, bitcoin was not mentioned even once. It was not a very prominent topic at the Republican National Convention, but it was mentioned. It was included in the party's policy platform. There was no such thing included at the Democratic National Convention. On the first day, the focus was on the upcoming election, Kamala versus Trump.
I have to say that there wasn't a huge amount of policy-focused discussion. It was mostly rhetorical and focused on general issues affecting Democratic voters, interspersed with the kind of enthusiastic language you'd expect at an event focused on selecting candidates for the Democratic Party in this election cycle.
While no policies were explicitly addressed, many of the issues Democrats consider important were: minority inclusion, women's rights, good-paying jobs and union security, health care (especially as it relates to COVID, which is still circulating even if people don't pay as much attention to it), and the perceived attempt by Republicans to roll back progress from the Democrats' perspective on many of these issues.
Several union leaders spoke in person or via recorded messages during the first day of the convention: the Arizona Pipefitters and Pumbers Union, the Communications Workers of America Union (CWA), the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). They all had a lot to say on the topic of jobs lost during COVID and the job recovery that occurred under the Biden administration. Another big topic was union pension funds. Union jobs are generally sought and coveted because of the benefits and retirement security that come with them, not simply the good base pay.
Is there anything that stands out to you? Perhaps the fact that bitcoin can actually create synergies and help promote these goals that Democrats seem to be concerned about?
bitcoin can certainly help economically suffering minorities, at least over long time horizons. Putting aside the aberration of this current market cycle, people who have held bitcoins for long periods of time have undoubtedly benefited from increased purchasing power. While it is true that it takes money to make money, and people who start with less will get less in terms of appreciation, anyone who has money to save has historically, over the long term, ended up with increased purchasing power. This won’t help poor people as much as those with a large surplus of money to invest, but it will help.
bitcoin can also help women maintain access to healthcare, which is increasingly banned in parts of the United States. Financial institutions have increasingly censored financial transactions deemed culturally problematic, despite their legal status. There is no reason to assume that this activity will continue to affect only people on the right side of the political spectrum. bitcoin is an alternative to traditional financial institutions, and people should not need to be told that it can work even for services that are considered outright illegal.
Employee pension funds have also recently started taking conservative exposure to bitcoin, which again, given long-term historical performance, could be a huge benefit to the long-term solvency issues facing pensions across the country.
bitcoin may even be a huge boost for renewable energy, something that liberals are deeply concerned about when it comes to mitigating the consequences of global climate change and maintaining our natural environment. bitcoin miners are in a very unique position, as ai operators have only just begun to fill a similar niche, by being buyers of stranded renewable energy before it is connected to the grid. This allows for revenue to be earned the moment these projects are finished, rather than having to wait for them to be connected to retail energy consumers on the grid.
This is to say nothing of the overall open access nature of bitcoin and how it can promote the philosophy of freedom and inclusion globally by giving people a choice in the face of struggle and resistance against totalitarian regimes around the world. bitcoin fits naturally into many of the beliefs and principles espoused by Democrats.
So why doesn't the Party as a whole pay attention to it? Why isn't anything similar to what the Republicans do mentioned or included in their political program?
It is the base. The recent bitcoin Survey in the United States The Nakamoto Project showed us that bitcoin ownership is a bipartisan issue, not concentrated on the right as it is generally perceived among the public. So why does that perception still exist? Narratives. Stories. Messaging. The reason the Democratic Party doesn’t care as much about bitcoin as a political issue isn’t because Democrats and liberals don’t use it or own it, it’s because of the broader narratives. perception is that bitcoin is a right-wing thing. associations The differences between bitcoin and important issues seem right-wing.
Democratic politicians will generally not care about bitcoin in terms of policy and will pander to Bitcoiners with positive policies unless those narratives and associations change. This is the reality of politics: politicians cater to their voters. They typically don’t take forward-thinking initiatives on their own unless they see some benefit in terms of positive voter reaction and perception towards that initiative. This is politics.
Yelling at politicians won't change that, demonizing them for their apathetic or negative and reactionary responses to the perception of being right-wing in a polarized political climate won't change that. You need to reach out to the voter base. That's the only thing that will bring about a change in attitude and action from Democratic politicians. People on the left need to be shown that bitcoin is something that aligns with their political goals and agendas and can move them forward, just as a broader perception has spread on the right.
It will undoubtedly be an uphill battle, given the burden of past and present perception, but this is the only way to counter the increasingly entrenched perception that bitcoin is right-wing. Without a concerted effort to demonstrate and build narratives that show left-leaning people that bitcoin can, and does, align with their values, bitcoin is doomed to be forced into a partisan left/right paradigm.
