The resolution claims that only currency sanctioned by a country’s central bank can be called a currency and that the word cryptocurrency is a misnomer as it is issued privately.
It also proposes that cryptocurrency users have a small window of time to trade or sell their cryptocurrency, apparently for fiat currency.
Earlier this year, the value of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin fell nearly 20% with just rumors of a blanket ban by the Indian government.
With Indian lawmakers apparently skip the decision to introduce the much-anticipated cryptocurrency regulations during the just-concluded winter session of parliament, the Swadeshi Jagran Manch (SJM) demanded a ban on all private currencies, while supporting exploration of blockchain technology.
the Swadeshi Jagran Manch is affiliated with the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) – an organization of right-wing Hindu nationalist paramilitary volunteers – and promotes a nationalist economic and cultural agenda.
In SJM’s resolution titled âTechnology Yes, Crypto No,â the organization calls for an outright ban on cryptocurrencies, calling them a threat to the nation’s interests. He lists five reasons for the same thing:
- Only a currency sanctioned by a country’s central bank can be called a currency and the word cryptocurrency is a misnomer as it is issued privately.
- Cryptocurrencies are widely used for criminal purposes by terrorists and money launderers.
- It is difficult to tax cryptocurrencies, especially currencies held in cold wallets.
- The tendency for large-scale fluctuations in value makes cryptocurrencies an inherently unreliable asset.
- Cryptocurrency mining consumes a lot of electricity.
What would that kind of ban look like?
While some of the reasons listed above are valid concerns, a âcryptocurrency banâ won’t solve any of them. For starters, it would be next to impossible to actually ban the use of cryptocurrencies. A general ban in the country could result in the closure of registered trade in the country.
But that would only serve to drive all crypto transactions underground to a more murky world with less regulation and oversight than there already is.
Essentially, a blanket cryptocurrency ban could have a similar effect to the e-cigarette ban in the country. Instead of stopping the use of electronic cigarettes, it has simply led many customers to more sketchy alternatives to the black market.
If instead the government had focused on regulation instead of an outright ban, it would have accelerated more research, steps towards understanding the impact of use in order to mitigate the harm. damage it could cause.
SJM’s resolution also proposes a particularly far-fetched solution to mitigate the impact that a ban will have on more than 15 million crypto users in the countryside. He proposes that cryptocurrency users have a small window of time to trade or sell their cryptocurrency, apparently for fiat currency.
But that ignores the fact that a sell-off frenzy will cause cryptocurrency values ââto plummet, having the same effect as a ban without a provision except with additional steps.
There is precedent for making this prediction. Earlier this year, the value of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin fell nearly 20% with just rumors of a blanket ban by the Indian government.