A Dual Revolution: Cryptocurrency is Adding to Our Lexicon
“We should admit rather that power produces knowledge (and not simply by encouraging it because it serves power or by applying it because it is useful); that power and knowledge directly imply one another; that there is no power relation without the correlative constitution of a field of knowledge, nor any knowledge that does not presuppose and constitute at the same time power relations.”
— Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of A Prison
Cryptocurrencies: what began as a modest undertaking has rapidly burgeoned into a trillion-dollar industry. Cryptocurrencies have evolved from obscurity to a potent force that now contests established central authorities, including traditional financial institutions. This transformative journey not only reshapes economic landscapes but also introduces an intriguing linguistic evolution. The lexicon associated with cryptocurrencies represents a parallel discourse challenging the very linguistic structures underpinning centralized control. In this “dual revolution,” cryptocurrencies disrupt financial norms while simultaneously weaving a lexicon that challenges the linguistic status quo, collectively embodying a profound shift in how we conceptualize both financial systems and the words that define them.
So, let us look at some examples of “new words” in this new lexicon and how they expand our current “episteme” (alongside the existing ideals they challenge).
“In any given culture and at any given moment, there is always only one episteme that defines the conditions of possibility of all knowledge, whether expressed in a theory or silently invested in a practice.”
— Michel Foucault, The Order of Things
“Decentralized”
“Decentralized” is a term that captures the essence of distributed networks. Where as centralized currencies force us to rely on a centralized institution like a bank to verify transactions, a decentralized currency relies on a consensus mechanism where a distributed network of nodes verify all transactions. So a decentralized cryptocurrency removes the need for centralized institutions like banks. With the creation of cryptocurrencies, “decentralization” has seamlessly navigated into discussions, alluding to systems that exhibit a departure from centralized structures. But that is not to say that the word “decentralized” is used quietly, instead it to say that “decentralized” has been deemed the correct way of implementing a currency. So the underlying assumption of any new cryptocurrency is that it is decentralized.
In fact, the cryptocurrency community harbors a distinct aversion to centralized cryptocurrencies, which run at odds to the core principles of decentralization and user autonomy. Vitalik Buterin, one of the key founders of the Ethereum blockchain, himself lashed out at XRP when he claimed that it “was still completely centralized” in an interview with Bankless. In this new discourse, “centralized” currencies are inappropriate and serve as an example of an idea/practice that was once acceptable but is now being suppressed.
“Non-Custodial”
The growing prevalence of the term “non-custodial” within the world of cryptocurrencies represents a fundamental challenge to entrenched centralized institutions. This word, which conveys the concept of users retaining control over their assets without the need for intermediaries, strikes at the core of the traditional custodial model upheld by centralized entities like banks. Centralized banks today have a surprisingly large role in controlling assets that are considered to be the property of customers. Centralized banks are often used as weapons against political opponents and protestors (like those in Canada and Hong Kong).
Additionally, “non-custodial” is a term often brought up in conversations about wallets. In the cryptocurrency world, “non-custodial” wallets are almost universally considered better options over “custodial” ones.
“Open Source”
While the concept of “open source” is not new by any means, its significance has been revitalized and magnified with the advent of cryptocurrencies. A cryptocurrency’s blockchain not only stores its code, transactions, and addresses on a public ledger available to all, but the actual code has to be distributed out to validators to run on their own nodes. The public does not only have access to the code and public ledger (ledger here refers to a record of transactions and is not the be confused with the company Ledger), but is also required to run the network. In this way, cryptocurrencies go above and beyond the existing understanding of “open source.”
The transparent and communal nature of open-source projects aligns seamlessly with the principles of decentralization that underlie cryptocurrencies. This synergy has resulted in the creation of blockchain platforms, wallets, and various decentralized applications that are accessible, auditable, and customizable by a global community. “Open source” also speaks to being true to the “decentralized” and “non-custodial” aspects of cryptocurrencies. “Open source” means you are confidant that your wallet, app, or platform is completely trustless and legitimate, so much so that you are willing to give out the code to the public and let them determine for themselves.
In the world of cryptocurrencies, “open source” is the universal standard, yet traditional practice in the overall software world is to remain “closed source.” In fact, Microsoft’s Windows — since its inception in 1985 — is the most popular desktop operating system in the world, yet it is still vehemently “closed source.”
Cryptocurrencies have rapidly grown into a trillion-dollar industry, disrupting established authorities. This evolution brings not only financial change but also a fresh new lexicon. The crypto lexicon introduces terms like “decentralized,” embodying the shift from centralized structures. “Non-custodial” challenges custodial norms upheld by banks, while “open source” sets new standards for software development, fostering transparency and collaboration. This dual revolution reshapes our understanding of finance — including what practices are inherently deemed appropriate and inappropriate — as it quickly bleeds into our language.
If you enjoyed reading this, consider following/clapping. It helps a lot!
Need help with crypto gas fees? Go here: https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoGasFees/
