Author: David Hoffman, Founder of Bankless
Compiled by: Hu Tao, ChainCatcher
This year's Davos Forum was truly spectacular.
It brought together many heavyweight figures from the cryptocurrency industry, including Brian Armstrong, Jeremy Allaire, CZ, and Larry Fink.
Although cryptocurrency was a focal point of this forum, what truly captured attention was the Trump administration's clear statement regarding a phased shift in the global order.
Two significant speeches at the Davos Forum highlighted this point. U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard delivered a speech titled "Globalization Has Failed," while Canadian Prime Minister Mark responded by saying, "The rules-based international order is experiencing a rupture, not a transformation."
Rules-Based International Order vs. Law of the Jungle
Since World War II, the international community has maintained a certain degree of order and cooperation. Although the United Nations has relatively little power, it is highly respected in the decision-making of various countries and plays a pivotal role.
"International law" once truly existed, but mainly because we all believed in it. We collectively赋予 it meaning.
The Trump administration decided to puncture this shared illusion.
Trump believes that this "rules-based international order" exists only because the United States allows it to exist. As the most powerful nation with the strongest military force, this means that we are the ones who truly构建 this "rules-based international order," and Trump's "America First" philosophy means he no longer wants to play nice with the rest of the world.
According to Trump, as elaborated in Lutnick's speech, this model does not serve the best interests of the United States, so we are now taking a different path.
Nic Carter is right—the state is the highest level of organization that humanity has created. Before the nation-state, religion and monarchy were the highest levels of organizational structure that humans could create, and before that were feudal systems and tribes.
We attempted to build higher-level organizational structures through "common agreements" with institutions like the United Nations, but these agreements ultimately proved very fragile and had minimal impact on the world.
Therefore, our current situation is this: by 2026, the United States has abandoned the attempt to build a higher-level unified organizational structure and claims that we are better off going it alone.
It is worth mentioning that "pariah states" like Russia and Iran have恰恰 thrived by relying on a weak international order. They have always adhered to the law of the strong and exploited the weaknesses of the "rules-based international order" to expand their power, committing human rights violations that the United Nations merely condemns.
Although it is regrettable to see the attempts at global cooperation ultimately fail, at least we can finally be frank in pointing out that countries like Russia never truly followed these rules.
Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Decentralized Crypto Protocols
Decentralized crypto protocols are powerful and autonomous "higher-level organizational structures" that failed to materialize from the "rules-based international order" paradigm.
Trump's分裂 of the unified international community is precisely the situation that Ethereum aims to balance.
When the unified world falls apart and degenerates into regional powers, Ethereum reunites it in cyberspace.
These protocols do not enforce laws or protect their members. They do not replace nation-states. However, they are a ubiquitous, autonomous coordination layer for the people of the world to unite.
The conversation between Brian Armstrong and the Governor of the Bank of France exemplifies this power. The central bank governor made the mistake that all central bank governors make: misunderstanding and underestimating Bitcoin. Brian corrected him, pointing out that "Bitcoin has no issuer—it is a decentralized protocol...", and then he went on to elaborate on Bitcoin's most important role in unifying the world: "...[Bitcoin] is actually the most effective accountability mechanism for deficit spending."
No, we cannot establish a "rules-based international order" through voluntary coordination and cooperation among nations. But can we obtain a "rules-based international order" from a decentralized, cryptography-based internet protocol?
Bitcoin operates on "if...then..." statements. In my opinion, that sounds like a "rules-based international order." Doesn't Ethereum extend the same principle to Turing-complete smart contracts?
Despite the current atmosphere of despair and negativity in the cryptocurrency industry, I still firmly believe that we are far from tapping the potential of smart contracts.
So, perhaps we won't get a "rules-based international order" from the United Nations.
Perhaps we will get it from an unexpected place.
Perhaps we will get it from Ethereum.
