Watch them nationalize MSTR
Login to reply
Replies (16)
bro.
🫥
They would do it. Modern 6102
Oh, I know they would. #oof
What?
It’s a national vulnerability the way it’s set up. Nationalizing it would be the modern 6102.
When was the last time the United States nationalized Fortune 500 Company?
AIG 2008
Fortune ten actually lol!!
The AI doesn’t think I’m that crazy:
In the context of the current (2025) scenario you’ve outlined—ongoing trade wars, financial instability, equity market downturn, and heightened geopolitical tensions—the likelihood of the U.S. government nationalizing MicroStrategy (MSTR), or at least its Bitcoin holdings, is objectively higher than it was previously. Here’s why:
Factors Making Nationalization Plausible:
1. Severe Economic Instability
During major financial crises, governments historically resort to extreme measures, including nationalization, as happened in the 2008 financial crisis (e.g., AIG, GM, Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac). A severe equity crash could create both the motive and political cover for radical interventions.
2. Bitcoin’s Rising Strategic Importance
Bitcoin has become increasingly relevant as a neutral global asset. With growing de-dollarization pressures and international trade disruptions, the U.S. might see Bitcoin as a strategic hedge or reserve asset against dollar vulnerability, prompting the seizure of strategic BTC reserves (like MSTR’s holdings).
3. Geopolitical Competition
Trade wars and heightened tensions, particularly between the U.S., China, and Russia, can push governments to take dramatic actions to secure strategic assets. If competitors began accumulating Bitcoin aggressively, the U.S. might feel compelled to respond similarly by acquiring BTC reserves quickly via nationalization.
4. Regulatory Precedents
Regulatory frameworks around Bitcoin remain relatively flexible but tightening quickly. An emergency regulatory move under national security laws, banking regulations, or economic stabilization acts could feasibly justify temporary (or even permanent) seizure of strategic Bitcoin reserves.
Factors Reducing Likelihood:
• Political and Economic Fallout
A full-scale nationalization would send shockwaves through financial markets and could severely damage investor confidence, leading to unintended consequences domestically and internationally.
• Legal and Constitutional Challenges
Any attempt at outright nationalization would trigger immediate and substantial legal battles, likely leading to a Supreme Court challenge reminiscent of Truman’s steel seizure in 1952 (Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer), which ended unfavorably for the government.
• Public Backlash & Ideological Resistance
The U.S. traditionally favors private property rights and free-market capitalism. Even in crisis, nationalizing a prominent publicly traded company could face significant pushback politically, economically, and culturally.
Most Realistic Scenario:
Rather than full-scale nationalization, a realistic scenario could involve:
• Partial Nationalization or “Bailout”:
A situation where MSTR faces liquidity or solvency issues due to a severe equity downturn, leading the government to “bail out” the company by taking a large equity stake in return, similar to GM or AIG in 2008. This approach provides political cover and mitigates backlash.
• Strategic BTC Reserve Creation:
The government might acquire a significant portion of MSTR’s BTC holdings through negotiated acquisition rather than outright seizure, thus avoiding a direct clash over property rights.
⸻
Conclusion (Objective Analysis):
While outright nationalization is still unlikely under normal conditions, the specific combination of an ongoing equity crash, escalating trade wars, and increased geopolitical pressures makes some form of strategic intervention or partial nationalization considerably more plausible than previously imagined.
If conditions deteriorate further—particularly if Bitcoin’s strategic relevance continues to surge—this scenario moves from being purely theoretical toward genuine strategic contingency.
View quoted note →
Coinbase is more likely and will accomplish the same.
Either way people need to self custody
Not as likely IMO. CB be fed to the wolves and used as justification
But i actually know nothing
Actually… you may be right about this
MSTR doesn't hold their keys.
Coinbase coupe be swung to the general public as a service... "This quantity of reserves including pension funds, large institutions, and more is dangerous in the hands of a private or public company. It is better for this kind of asset to be managed by the government itself in a more structured manner. The treasury is the right place for this and the US has seen the success over generations. It is in the public's best interest and for the savety of all those who hold these funds."
