Recently @JasonPLowery disclosed on Twitter his intention to push for a ‘US Hash Force’ within the DoD. The reason being dominating energy expenditure is merely an evolved, peaceful form of power projection.

Assuming cryptocurrencies are here to stay, I think there’s a lot of sensibility to the notion that any military will inevitably formulate some form of a hash force as it’d prevent disempowerment from increasing cryptocurrency reliance in their economies.

Though, understandably, many crypto advocates are not a fan of this idea. They think the military should leave crypto mining (namely bitcoin) to the free market.

The main points against this proposal seem to be:

  1. Not wanting more mining competition
  2. Unwilling to accept as a form of tax allocation
  3. Optics

Maybe the adoption rate is hindered if the US military were to automatically sustain an obscene proportion of the network’s total hash rate. Collectively, sentiment towards bitcoin could change if the free market shifts focus to where they have a competitive advantage - including other countries (presuming they won’t compete if they can’t compete just like China is choosing not to partake if they can’t win). Lastly, it creates somewhat of a paradox to use tax money to fuel what can be used to, well, avoid taxes (in some cases) - cue regulation.

However, I don’t think these reasons are enough to say it won’t or shouldn’t happen. The real question is the timing of its execution.

If bitcoin ends up being pegged to the USD, for globalization purposes, it doesn’t matter if bitcoin itself is or isn’t adopted. As in, the US will be able to print more USD so the globalization vector could be (even more so) through USD.

That being said, monetary policy adoption of bitcoin in other countries shouldn’t be deterred. Given that, I think the most strategic path the US can take is to usher all ally countries to set up such infrastructure first (towards bitcoin) and choose to focus energy resources on mining Bitflate instead.

Why?

  1. “More bang for their buck”
  2. Adopting a system that gets increasingly more fair over time can be a virtue signal for ensuring the survival of a system that gets increasingly less fair over time (e.g. Hybrid Coins). In this way, the US can claim territorial dominance in the same domain without obstructing fostering cultural ties and ideologies. More importantly, the ever-expanding supply of Bitflate both subdues the concern of increasing centralization and provides a more substantive reason to periodically increase the budget towards such an initiative.

Having said that, perhaps the US could move faster on such an initiative funding it through individual varying state budgets as opposed to directly through the DoD but with the assistance & approval of the DoD. Under such a system, the incentive to be efficient with the state’s expenditures and the payoff for increasing state revenue would be amplified. Not to mention, it could be easier to execute (temporary) social welfare airdrops with individual state responsibility as opposed to a program implemented on a federal level.

The benefits of a strong and capable military definitely shouldn’t be taken for granted; though, because individuals mesh “defense” & “violence”, they could perceive the US military’s direct involvement in cryptocurrency mining (before necessary) to be just like if Marlboro decided they’re going to dominate the marijuana industry.

Nevertheless, it’s likely to be imperative that every country that intends to remain relevant in the next millennia pursues the formation of a ‘Hash Force’.