Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan has long railed against Bitcoin, essentially calling it a scam. This sentiment was proved true, for many ICO’s


Yesterday the corporation announced their “JPM Coin” linked to the US dollar. In all fairness some complex interrelations of centralized banking institutions are typically obfuscated from public view. Admittedly, centralized financial services are also not our express areas of interest

It is clear that many impressive intellects of strong capabilities have dedicated considerable time as well as vast resources towards such corporate systems. And to them we say, well done

Although the issue is not technical ability, it is one of principle

By decentralization, blockchain based currencies function to extend individual utility. They can have many benefits. As one example direct use can provide a practical alternative to traditional mediums of exchange. Cryptocurrencies can have the potential to omit or minimize tracking and restrictions currently imposed by centralized institutions

From JP Morgan’s website, using the JPM Coin:


Here practical individual utility, access to the coins and systems, becomes dependent on formal adherence to centrally authorized use. This manner of use could be seen to negate the purpose of distributed ledger technologies

From PayPal, WeChat Pay, TransferWise to any number of currently active platforms – registration of a credit card or bank account permits almost instant and secure international financial transfers

In the above diagram, payments into or out of the bank now have an additional form or authorization added on top of [or below] existing protocols. That you increase the required distance to faster reach a destination is logically incoherent

Precedence for the JPM Coin should be neither justified by enhanced speed or security in transfer [189] The company states, on the page with the diagram, that they presently have a $2.6 trillion USD portfolio. When viewed together it is clear that without DLT, existing levels of trusted exchange are already robust

Enhancement of control

Centrally backed or equivalently linked cryptocurrencies can tout a “freedom from volatility” however this statement could hold similar validity as mortgage backed securities being unshakable because ‘property prices always go up’ [190]

Following the mass adoption of products like JPM Coin to a logical conclusion may compare to having the once partial privacy of paper money [cash] turned into centralized institution’s digital tracking of all financial activity. As a thought experiment, let's imagine a dystopian future where all forms of exchange have been digitized and done so only by centralized institutions:

In this scene every exchange is electronically signed with both the sender and recipient’s centrally issued personal identification. All in and out flows of resources are permanently centrally tracked. ATM’s can be removed for now to have money is to use a centralized, digital currency. Use is under set policies and then most notably only for set purposes

Likewise employment must now be for authorized endeavors and payment then transferred to centrally permitted destinations. The absence of privately managed fungible resources or comparable individually controlled mediums for exchange is for centralized institutions to achieve total financial domination

The contention is not necessarily one of anonymous currencies per se. It's avoiding a gradual removal of privacy and freedoms. More it is a preservation of choice in participation, one which has been consciously determined by the actual participant's in line with their determined benefits of such. A democratic rationality of protected, participant autonomy


In 1729 Benjamin Franklin wrote “A Modest Enquiry into the Nature and Necessity of a Paper Currency subsequently reasoning that England’s restrictions and failure to recognize the colony’s new currency was a primary cause of the war for independence [191]

In the Colonies, we issue our own paper money. It is called ‘Colonial Scrip.’ We issue it in proper proportion to make the goods and pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power and we have no interest to pay to no one… The Colonies would gladly have borne the little tax on tea and other matters had it not been the poverty caused by the bad influence of the English bankers on the Parliament, which has caused in the Colonies hatred of England and the Revolutionary War  Benjamin Franklin [192]

John Twells [193]It was the monetary system under which America’s Colonies flourished to such an extent that Edmund Burke was able to write about them: ‘Nothing in the history of the world resembles their progress. It was a sound and beneficial system, and its effects led to the happiness of the people.

In a bad hour, the British Parliament took away from America its representative money, forbade any further issue of bills of credit, these bills ceasing to be legal tender, and ordered that all taxes should be paid in coins. Consider now the consequences: this restriction of the medium of exchange paralyzed all the industrial energies of the people. Ruin took place in these once flourishing Colonies; most rigorous distress visited every family and every business, discontent became desperation, and reached a point, to use the words of Dr. Johnson, when human nature rises up and assets its rights

The colony’s utilization of an independent currency removed types of centralized tracking, taxation and debt through lending. Today centralized institutions control most forms of financial production, rates and values. This permits lending of created currencies with interest attached

Parallels to ongoing central use of decentralized technologies can be drawn if you see fit. To us it appears allegiance demanded falls to entities renamed

In choice of action, you have inherent and immutable agency. You each have rights to [privately] make choice personal. These stay yours for as long as you decide



art of