Bitcoin is now your sole escape as Canada declares the existing global structure a mere “pleasant illusion.”

Canada’s Prime Minister, Mark Carney, took the stage at the World Economic Forum in Davos yesterday and articulated a stark reality.

The established rules-based order, often referenced by leaders when they wish to encourage global compliance, is deteriorating.

Carney described it as a “pleasant fiction.”

He emphasized that we are experiencing a “rupture.”

He stated that major powers are employing integration as a weapon, tariffs as leverage, finance as a means of coercion, and supply chains as exploitable weaknesses.

He then invoked Václav Havel’s notable “greengrocer” from The Power of the Powerless, the store owner who displays a sign reading “Workers of the world, unite!” not due to conviction, but because he understands that the ritual matters more than the actual words. It represents Havel’s shorthand for existence under a regime where loyalty is publicly demonstrated, despite a private acknowledgment of the falsehood.

He urged the audience, “It is time for companies and nations to remove their signs.”

The audience at Davos responded with applause and cheers.

One might suggest that they are conditioned to agree. This week, they have additional motivations.

The conversation around town has revolved around tariffs and coercion, and whether allies are soon to be treated as revenue sources.

The atmosphere is influenced by President Trump intensifying pressure regarding Greenland and tariff threats directed at European partners, a narrative that keeps reappearing in conference discussions and the media.

Related Reading

How United States could make Greenland the largest Bitcoin mining operation on earth – with clean energy

An overlooked energy study reveals that Greenland’s wind capacity could theoretically supply power to the global Bitcoin network ten times over.

Jan 8, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

Carney’s presentation was designated as a “Special Address” in the lead-up to the WEF. His message resonated with an audience that was already prepared for it.

Here is a crucial point that those in the crypto space should not overlook: when geopolitics turns transactional in the public eye, money transitions from being a mere backdrop to becoming a boundary.

This transformation alters what people are willing to pay for.

It reshapes what investors consider valuable. It modifies what is perceived as a secure choice.

Bitcoin occupies a central position in this shifting perception.

Not because it will suddenly become a universal settlement medium for trade invoices. That is unlikely.

Not because it will seamlessly replace the dollar. That is almost certainly not the case.

Bitcoin is significant because it provides an alternative: a credible external asset that is difficult to obstruct, challenging to alter, and not easily confined behind someone else’s approval.

In a stable environment, this notion appears ideological. In a ruptured context, it begins to resemble risk management.

Carney even utilized risk management terminology. He acknowledged that this audience understands it. He mentioned that insurance incurs a cost, which can be distributed.

Joint investments in resilience are less expensive than each entity constructing its own defenses.

This reflects the Davos version of a lesson every investor learns early: concentration risk feels manageable until it doesn’t.

The human aspect of this narrative, the realization that access can be conditional

Most individuals do not awaken seeking a new monetary framework.

They rise wanting their salary to clear, their bank transfer to process, their business to continue operating, and their savings to remain significant in the coming year.

However, there comes a moment—occasionally triggered by a headline, a blocked payment, or a currency shock—when they recognize that access can indeed be conditional.

Carney’s address serves as a roadmap for how these realizations proliferate.

He discussed tariffs being wielded as leverage.

He mentioned financial infrastructure functioning as coercion.

He talked about supply chains being manipulated as weaknesses.

“In the past two decades, a succession of crises in finance, health, energy, and geopolitics have exposed the risks of extreme global integration. More recently, however, major powers have begun to weaponize economic integration, utilizing tariffs as leverage, financial infrastructure as coercion, and supply chains as vulnerabilities to exploit.

You cannot exist within the illusion of mutual benefit through integration when that integration becomes the root of your subjugation.”

This encapsulates what a “rupture” feels like in everyday terms. Your expenses fluctuate due to a speech given in a distant capital. Your suppliers vanish due to a sanctions package. Your payment channels slow down because a bank deems your jurisdiction too risky this month.

Even if you never engage with crypto, such an environment alters how you assess optionality.

Bitcoin represents optionality with substance.

It is not a miracle.

It does not eliminate geopolitics.

It does not exempt anyone from regulations.

It does not diminish volatility.

It performs one straightforward function: it exists outside the majority of the choke points that render modern finance such an effective instrument of state authority.

This is why this moment holds more significance than a single Davos address.

Related Reading

Bitcoin becomes a macroeconomic asset as countries race to ramp up adoption

A Bitcoin Policy Institute report identified active Bitcoin exposure in 27 countries, while 13 have proposed legislation to gain such exposure.

Sep 24, 2025 · Gino Matos

Two Bitcoins emerge in markets, the insurance version and the liquidity version

If you wish to discuss Bitcoin in a shifting world order without resorting to slogans, you must acknowledge something that may unsettle true believers.

Bitcoin has two identities in the marketplace.

• One is the insurance asset. Individuals purchase it due to concerns about the infrastructure, the long-term outlook, the global situation, and the regulations. They seek something that can traverse borders as information.
• The other is the liquidity asset. In moments of sudden upheaval, Bitcoin behaves like the asset that gets sold when individuals urgently need dollars.

This second identity explains why “rupture” headlines can lead to erratic price movements. The macro narrative grows more alarming, yet Bitcoin may still decline.

The immediate reaction is a rush for dollars: credit tightens, leverage unwinds, risk is sold off first, and inquiries follow later.

There’s a sequence: immediate pressure, followed by repricing.

Related Reading

Bilionaire Ray Dalio reiterates warnings of dollar decline, suggests Bitcoin as a hedge

Billionaire investor and hedge fund manager Ray Dalio anticipates diminishing confidence in the dollar may lead investors toward Bitcoin and gold.

Sep 3, 2025 · Assad Jafri

Tariffs as leverage, why the initial wave can harm Bitcoin, then bolster its narrative

Tariffs are more than just a tax; they serve as a signal.

They convey to markets the state of international relations, inform companies about the stability of their cost structures, and alert central banks to potential inflation challenges.

This is where Carney’s point about weaponized integration connects directly to Bitcoin’s short-term and long-term trajectory.

If the current tariff threats escalate into actual measures, companies will re-evaluate supply chains, consumers will experience price pressures, and policymakers will confront more difficult trade-offs.

The JPMorgan perspective on tariffs serves as a reminder that they transcend mere politics. They function as a macro variable that impacts growth, inflation, and confidence.

Initially, markets often react as they typically do. They become defensive, favor cash, opt for the most liquid collateral, and prioritize dollars.

Bitcoin may be dragged down along with everything else.

Then the second phase arrives.

Businesses and households come to understand that this is not a fleeting event. They begin investing in resilience. They diversify, create redundancies, and search for assets that exist outside the obvious pressure points.

This is where Bitcoin’s insurance narrative gains traction. Not every individual becomes a Bitcoin maximalist due to a thorough reading of the Bitcoin Whitepaper, but a larger portion of capital begins to view optionality as worthy of investment.

Financial infrastructure as coercion, stablecoins operate within the rails, Bitcoin exists outside of them

Carney’s statement regarding financial infrastructure is significant as it highlights a part of the crypto landscape that many misunderstand.

Stablecoins are a form of crypto, and they also represent the dollar’s extended reach.

They facilitate rapid movement, settle inexpensively, and simplify cross-border value transfer. However, they also operate within a framework of issuers, compliance, blacklists, and regulatory hurdles.

This is not merely a moral judgment. It is an inherent design, which is also why stablecoins can achieve scalability.

Related Reading

How crypto is being devoured by TradFi, killing Satoshi’s dream by rewarding centralization

Bitcoin is being subtly appropriated by “broken” financial systems, creating a surveillance trap disguised as a significant market rally.

Jan 18, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

In a landscape where financial infrastructure becomes increasingly coercive, stablecoins may resemble a superhighway laden with toll booths.

Bitcoin feels like a dirt road that still provides a route out. This distinction grows more crucial as nations and coalitions begin constructing their resilience frameworks.

Carney referred to it as variable geometry: varying coalitions for different challenges. He discussed buyers’ clubs for essential minerals, bridging trade blocs, and AI governance among aligned democracies.

This logic is also evident in the policy realm concerning defense procurement, including Europe’s SAFE initiative.

It pertains to capacity, coordination, and optionality. Crypto will inevitably be drawn into that same sphere.

Some blocs may prefer regulated, monitored systems. Others will forge their own. Some will limit foreign dependencies. Some will discreetly maintain ties to multiple options.

Bitcoin’s role in that context is amplified simply by its existence.

If exit is possible, even if imperfectly, coercion becomes more costly to enforce.

Middle powers, “third paths,” and the potential psychological impact of Bitcoin

Carney’s address serves as a manifesto for middle powers: nations that cannot dictate terms independently and are squeezed when major powers turn global affairs into bilateral negotiations.

He articulated that negotiating alone with a dominant power equates to negotiating from a position of weakness. He stated that middle powers have a choice: vie for favor or unite to create a third path.

This is a geopolitical stance.

It also resonates with what Bitcoin signifies in finance.

Bitcoin stands as a third-path asset.

It is not the currency of a hegemon. It is not the currency of a rival. It does not belong to a corporate ledger. It is not a treaty.

This distinction is most significant when trust is tenuous and alignment is complex, when alliances seem conditional, and when sovereignty feels less like a principle and more like something requiring financial backing.

Carney expressed solidarity with Greenland and Denmark in his remarks.

He opposed tariffs concerning Greenland and advocated for focused discussions on Arctic security and prosperity.

You need not have an opinion on Greenland to recognize the trend. Trade tools are being openly discussed as leverage among allies.

When this occurs, every CFO, every pension committee, every sovereign fund, and every household with savings begins to take tail risks more seriously.

That is what is significant for us: the gradual shift in perception of what is considered safe.

Related Reading

Putin says Bitcoin is inevitable, endorses BTC over US dollar as global reserve currency

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s endorsement of Bitcoin signifies a strategic shift in Russia’s economic policy, with crypto playing a pivotal role in navigating Western sanctions.

Dec 4, 2024 · Assad Jafri

US President Donald Trump stated today that he “would not use force” to acquire Greenland but reiterated his desire to purchase the “big block of ice.” He emphasized that he expects Europe to back the acquisition for global security reasons, but if it does not, “the US will remember.”

Three potential scenarios for Bitcoin by 2030: “managed fragmentation,” “tariff spiral,” “rails fracture”

Carney referred to this as a rupture.

He also cautioned against a world of fortresses and advocated for shared resilience. These represent two distinct futures, with Bitcoin’s trajectory differing in each.

1) Managed fragmentation

Coalitions emerge, standards diverge, and trade routes evolve. Coercion persists, but it remains contained as everyone realizes the costs of escalation.

In this scenario, Bitcoin trends upward, serving as a portfolio’s ultimate insurance policy. Volatility continues.

Correlation to liquidity cycles persists. The structural demand increases because the world continues to invest in optionality.

2) Tariff spiral and dollar squeeze

Tariffs escalate, leading to retaliation.

Inflation uncertainty rises, central banks maintain tight policies for longer, and risk assets suffer. A dollar squeeze materializes.

In this context, Bitcoin may appear disappointing initially.

Prices may decline due to unwinding leverage, narratives may be ridiculed, but eventually policy shifts, liquidity returns, and the fundamental reasons for seeking an exit option grow stronger.

3) Rails fracture

Financial coercion expands. Secondary sanctions and controls become increasingly common. Cross-border payments become more politicized.

Some nations establish parallel settlement systems, some companies redirect their exposure, and everyone incurs higher friction costs.

Bitcoin’s insurance value peaks in this scenario as the costs associated with conditional access are at their highest.

While stablecoins remain essential for commerce, Bitcoin holds significance for reserve optionality, portability, and the ability to transfer value when access is restricted.

This is also the environment in which regulation intensifies. A fractured world tends to be more suspicious, and the simplest measure for states to tighten is anything resembling capital flight.

Bitcoin’s potential benefits coexist with heightened enforcement pressures. This tension becomes a key component of the narrative.

The subtle indication, even Davos is shifting its focus to resilience rather than efficiency

The previous globalization narrative was centered on efficiency: just-in-time supply chains, singular optimization, and seamless capital.

Carney’s speech prioritizes resilience, redundancy, shared standards, and variable coalitions.

And this shift is occurring at Davos, the epicenter of integration. This is the indication. Even the terminology around the “rules-based order” is evolving in public discourse.

The WEF theme continues to emphasize cooperation. The framing remains dialogue-centric. And the agenda is brimming with discussions on resilience because the participants recognize that the bargain Carney outlined is under strain.

Related Reading

BlackRock CEO Larry Fink appointed as WEF interim co-chair

BlackRock CEO Larry Fink has been appointed interim co-chair of the World Economic Forum, alongside Roche’s André Hoffmann.

Aug 17, 2025 · Christina Comben

Beyond Davos, the news cycle reinforces this notion.

The UN Security Council continues to extend reporting related to Red Sea attacks, reminding everyone that shipping lanes are of strategic importance. The UN documentation highlights how persistent this risk remains.

The AP’s coverage of the Venezuela tanker seizures demonstrates how hard power and economic control are intertwining in the Western Hemisphere as well.

Le Monde’s article on a US-Taiwan agreement regarding advanced chips and tariffs illustrates how industrial policy and trade are merging, even in areas that were previously viewed strictly through an economic lens.

Bitcoin does not cause any of these developments.

And it does not resolve them.

Its relevance increases as the world around it evolves.

What to monitor next, five indicators that the rupture thesis is gaining traction

A watchlist to keep an eye on:

1. Tariff implementation timelines, and whether threats materialize into policy. The tariff reporting related to Greenland is one immediate test.
2. Indications of allies constructing redundancy frameworks: defense procurement collaboration, trade networks, critical-minerals buyers’ clubs, and the policy mechanisms that render “shared resilience” tangible.
3. <strong