If they haven't done it by now, then they don't currently see it as a threat.
Now let's say in a few years, that inflection point happens where crypto sees an exponential rate of adoption. Every other country begins to use it, some ban it, many others adopt it. At that point, if not using crypto will put the US at a disadvantage, they have no other choice but to adopt it as well.
A semi-related example is the way many companies "disrupt" the markets e.g. Uber/Airbnb wasn't a threat to many cities, until it was. At which point, the demand for Uber/Airbnb outweighed the government's ability to do anything about it.
It's not the best example since some cities have done things about it and Uber/Airbnb, being a company, is easier to target.
With crypto, its decentralized nature makes it much more difficult to control and attempting to ban it will raise issues around free speech.
That's not to say countries won't try and succeed in getting it banned, though in the case of the US, I don't think it's as cut and dry.
I mean all that US Govt needs to do to crash the price 90% is, accuse ... not even that, only hint, that Tesla’s BTC holdings might be tainted by drugs/terrorism financing/money laundering. Game over.
But what if it's not a conscious forfeit of power. The power is taken out from underneath them and by the time they realize it, they have no recourse. Other than threatening all countries that use the currency, which I don't see happening.
You’re saying all militarized countries on Earth will come to a point where Bitcoin is prominent and they will forfeit their power over their citizens without any fight?
You’re proposing Bitcoin will bring world peace without conflict?
They have no recourse because the box has opened, and the new economy is up and running. Barring your citizens from participating would put your whole country at a disadvantage.
Also, I don't think I agree with the notion that adopting crypto would result in a country forfeiting their power over the citizens. There are plenty of ways to integrate crypto into existing governments while still maintaining control.
I'm not claiming this will happen, more of contemplating on how a global decentralized currency can take over.
As far as bringing world peace, I don't think a decentralized currency would do any such thing. It's probably one of the required steps towards it, but one of many.
For example, if the rest of the world adopts BTC as the world's reserve currency, the USA would HAVE TO purchase crazy amounts of BTC, and defend against a 51% attack by investing into mining.
Meanwhile, the USA could try to preempt this future, but only the USA is incentivized to have USD be the world's reserve currency. As such the USA would need to threaten every other country in the world to stop using BTC, but its not clear if that causes BTC adoption to drop, or the Streisand Effect to kick in.
And ofcourse, "mutually assured destruction" stops any large country from employing too large a threat against any other large country.
Would any nation allow itself to be in a position where a coalition of the willing could perform a 51% attack on their currency? Because if not, only one country could use BTC or anything with the same mining algorithm.
If we are talking about a coordinated aggressive action to cripple the economy of a non-superpower nation, like today it requires a superpower to protect it.
If we are talking about a coordinated aggressive action to cripple the economy of a superpower nation, you're basically triggering "mutually assured destruction". As such its most productive to assume that doesn't occur.
Now let's say in a few years, that inflection point happens where crypto sees an exponential rate of adoption. Every other country begins to use it, some ban it, many others adopt it. At that point, if not using crypto will put the US at a disadvantage, they have no other choice but to adopt it as well.
A semi-related example is the way many companies "disrupt" the markets e.g. Uber/Airbnb wasn't a threat to many cities, until it was. At which point, the demand for Uber/Airbnb outweighed the government's ability to do anything about it.
It's not the best example since some cities have done things about it and Uber/Airbnb, being a company, is easier to target.
With crypto, its decentralized nature makes it much more difficult to control and attempting to ban it will raise issues around free speech.
That's not to say countries won't try and succeed in getting it banned, though in the case of the US, I don't think it's as cut and dry.