Below are guest posts and opinions Adrian Brink, co-founder of ANOMA.
In August 2025, Bitcoin hit a new all-time high, rekindling the usual flood of headlines and happiness on the sovereign money promise. However, the higher the price, the easier it is to overlook important blind spots. Cryptocurrency is not actually sovereignty. At least not so yet. why? Because individual blockchain users today have no choice but to rely on a single global security model. This surveillance is rarely discussed, but it is fundamental to understand when cryptography is to respond to its potential and fulfill its core promise, sovereignty.
In short, sovereignty is the practical ability of individuals and communities to control their own infrastructure, assets, and data on their own terms without being forced to trust or rely on distant global networks, corporate-owned data centers, or a set of valid sets that can be captured, censored or unavailable.
This idea is the foundation of the crypto industry’s vision, but at least it hasn’t been achieved yet.
The pitfalls of the monolithic consensus model
Modern consensus mechanisms rely on monolithic, globally synchronized networks of nodes operating synchronously across continents. Users, agencies, and governments are not capable of customizing trust assumptions based on specific needs, compliance requirements, or risk models.
It resembles a single global trust fabric for Crypto and has no room for sovereignty.
Furthermore, most current generated blockchains do not have control over our sensitive data. Using blockchain today means exposing your financial footprint to the world by default, especially for serious institutions looking to capitalize on this technology beyond holding on-chain assets.
Without the ability to control the data we share, crypto would never be truly sovereign with whom and for any purpose.
Global infrastructure is a vulnerability
Today’s infrastructure not only limits our agency, it also makes us vulnerable to global connectivity disruptions. Today’s blockchain security assumptions rely on a globally connected peace internet. In a world of relative geopolitical stability and free access to the Internet, this design works very well. But what happens when global connectivity fractures under pressure? Are we really sovereign when we rely on a single global network to use cryptography in our local community?
Global conflicts arise, submarine fiber optic cables are cut, governments seize bandwidth for military use, authoritarian regimes regulate connectivity within borders. Even in the peace period, this has not yet been off the table. Just this week, Asian internet connections were destroyed by a cutting cable in the Red Sea. Another recent controversial incident occurred in the Baltic Sea last November, leading to calls for sabotage from Northern European countries.
These are just a few of how our ability to freely trade and preserve values without interference or trusted third parties evaporates instantly with the assertions of sovereignty and our ability to instantly evaporates.
It’s a tough idea, but it’s something that needs to be considered and prepared if you expect the network to survive in an era of global tensions. This is a fragile fantasy hidden by market capitalization. Price alone cannot protect against systematic infrastructure obstacles. High ratings are not shields against third-party threats if the network itself is physically and politically vulnerable.
The good news is that we have the technology that reduces our dependence on global connectivity and gives our users true sovereignty and resilience.
Sovereignty is within our grasp
How do you do it? It requires innovation beyond the principles of hard money, led to strict global consensus mechanisms. True sovereignty means having an infrastructure that can operate locally when needed when a global network is disconnected, and being able to operate as globally as possible when conditions are improved.
This means choosing a preferred trust model and how data is shared.
Building a sovereign financial infrastructure based on a global consensus system that is hard, inflexible, and suitable for one size doesn’t reduce it. You need an incredible freeform system that can dynamically adapt to changing conditions, requirements, and geographical contexts that can remain synchronized with the global network, even if connectivity is broken. You need a more intelligent network that takes many forms and has the flexibility to evolve alongside users.
Such a system allows local sovereignty, where communities and users can trade and protect assets independently, without relying on continuous, unified, global consensus. These allow for elegant network partitions as different subnetworks can operate autonomously and locally while maintaining the ability to safely interoperate and synchronize upon reconnection.
Instead of a single global ledger, these systems allow for decentralized discovery of multiple overlapping trust domains and network participants. This allows participants to form autonomous subnetworks tailored to a variety of trust needs.
Each domain can act independently or as part of a larger network, as nodes connect between domains for collaboration. Zero-knowledge membership proofs nodes valid membership across individual and secure overlapping trust domains, allowing dynamic and secure interactions to maintain both local autonomy and global coordination.
Data protection and payment parameters become user configurable and enable sovereignty not as an abstract ideal but as a concrete technical function.
The brilliance of Bitcoin’s innovation as a globally shared ledger cannot and should not be denied. It catalyzed the entire industry and promoted the vision of decentralized money into reality. However, Crypto’s reliance on connections to monolithic global networks remains a persistent blind spot in a world of dynamic conditions, fluid social systems, and changing needs.
It is one of the final challenges to overcome in our quest for sovereignty.
To fully realize this vision, we must continue to move forward with an ambitious new approach to blockchain infrastructure. Now, we have a great opportunity to rethink basic assumptions about what sovereignty is, explore local autonomous systems, and embrace new architectures that can achieve these goals. The challenges are monumental, but the interests are nothing more than a future of digital sovereignty and economic freedom.