When the logic of power begins to erode financial decision-making, the crypto circle's instincts are always the most敏感.

As news of the White House contemplating appointing key figures to steer the Federal Reserve spreads, Bitcoin's candlestick chart starts to move subtly. This isn't panic; rather, it feels like a certain awakening of expectations—whenever central bank independence is questioned, the market's interest in decentralized assets quietly heats up.

Think carefully about this logic: the more concentrated the power in the traditional financial system, the easier it is to be hijacked by political factors. Interest rate decisions turn from economics into political chess, and the credit foundation of the dollar also wobbles. Against this backdrop, the appeal of safe-haven assets like Bitcoin and gold doesn't seem so "crazy"—they are essentially hedges against systemic risk.

Interestingly, the governance mechanism on Ethereum becomes a kind of irony: the transparency of DAO voting decisions is actually more trustworthy than the traditional central bank's "black box." Could this contrast rewrite people's understanding of the positioning of cryptocurrencies?

The real risk lies in uncertainty itself. Once political logic overrides economic logic, not only do traditional assets need to be re-priced, but the narrative of cryptocurrencies as "hedging tools" might also be rewritten. What markets fear most is never volatility itself, but the sudden change in game rules.