The meaning of being co-opted: Bitcoin between revolutionary ideals and market reality

The question of whether Bitcoin has been co-opted from its original purpose is now one of the most heated debates within the crypto community. This multifaceted meaning of adoption and compromise clearly emerges from recent market activities, particularly the decision by major holders to liquidate significant positions. At the current price of $69.89K, Bitcoin continues to oscillate between its original mission to revolutionize the financial system and the reality of a multi-billion dollar investment tool.

When the historic whales abandon the project: the Galaxy Digital case

Recently, Galaxy Digital sold approximately 80,000 BTC on the market, an event that reignited the debate about Bitcoin’s true nature of adoption. These tokens belonged to an early holder from 2011, one of the most dedicated holders of the project in its early years. Scott Melker, known host of the The Wolf of All Streets podcast and a crypto analyst, took the opportunity to express an uncomfortable observation: many of the early whales have begun to waver in their initial conviction and monetize their profits at these price levels.

What does true co-optation mean for Bitcoin?

The concept of Bitcoin co-optation strikes at the heart of its original promise. Melker articulated the dilemma in unequivocal terms: Bitcoin is extraordinary, but it has been clearly absorbed to some extent by the very forces it was designed to protect against. This evolution is not accidental but a natural result of mass adoption. As Bitcoin has become attractive to institutional investors and large capital, its anti-establishment nature has transformed into something different.

The significance of this transformation, however, is not universally shared. Matt Hougan, Chief Investment Officer of Bitwise, acknowledged Melker’s point while maintaining a more optimistic perspective. He emphasized that Bitcoin remains “extraordinarily revolutionary” because it represents the first form of global money backed not by state force and the threat of violence, but by mathematical logic and community consensus. For Hougan, the deeper meaning of Bitcoin transcends short-term market dynamics.

Diverging visions: idealism versus financial pragmatism

Investor Mike Alfred has presented a radically different perspective on the topic of co-optation. He argued that individual decisions to sell coins do not reflect any ideological betrayal but rather personal choices driven by factors unrelated to the protocol itself or the asset’s solidity. According to Alfred, when investment returns reach certain levels, their relevance naturally diminishes in the face of personal financial needs.

This exchange of views reveals a fundamental fracture within the Bitcoin community. On one side are those who see co-optation as an inevitable betrayal of Satoshi Nakamoto’s original dream. On the other are those who interpret mainstream adoption not as capitulation but as the realization of a vision of a “global money” accessible to anyone, regardless of political ideologies.

The evolutionary meaning of mass adoption

The contemporary debate about what it means to be co-opted reflects the inherent tension within Bitcoin: the desire to be both a store of value and a revolutionary currency, both a financial asset and an ideological movement. The trading decisions of historic whales are not symptoms of failure but rather evidence that Bitcoin has succeeded in penetrating the upper echelons of global finance, just as it was conceived.

What remains true is that Bitcoin, at $69.89K, continues to represent something unique in the global financial landscape. The true meaning of this adoption lies not in the fact that it has been co-opted but in the recognition that revolutionary ideas, when victorious, inevitably transform into infrastructure. And infrastructure, by nature, serves everyone, not just pure ideologues.