An interesting take by crypto analyst Pumpius has stirred controversy, suggesting that the Ripple vs. SEC lawsuit might have been a smokescreen orchestrated to divert attention. According to Pumpius, the real agenda behind the legal battle was obscured by the portrayal of Ripple as a rebel fighting against U.S. regulatory authorities.
Revealing Ripple’s True Mission Amid Regulatory Conflict
Pumpius argues that Ripple, contrary to popular belief, was not an outsider challenging the system but rather a strategic player focused on developing U.S.-backed global payment infrastructure. The company’s offerings, tailored for banks and institutions with features like low fees and instant settlement, indicate a design aimed at replacing SWIFT, the established global payments system.
Highlighting Ripple’s partnerships with entities like central banks, Federal Reserve projects, and defense-linked banks, Pumpius suggests that the company’s expansion was sanctioned rather than renegade innovation. He contends that the SEC lawsuit provided a cover for Ripple to quietly forge numerous partnerships with major financial institutions globally, positioning itself for international payment corridors before consolidating its presence in the U.S.
XRPL: The U.S. Government’s Blockchain Agenda
Looking beyond payments, Pumpius speculates that the U.S. might leverage XRPL as the foundation for a blockchain-based reserve network, aiming to transition control from traditional banking systems to a government-affiliated ledger. He points to RLUSD, Ripple’s compliant stablecoin, as a pivotal piece designed for institutional use and integration with XRPL, potentially serving as a domestic bridge asset alongside XRP for global settlements.
Pumpius raises concerns about the broader implications of XRPL’s capabilities, suggesting that beyond moving money, the platform could facilitate the transfer of sensitive assets like DNA data. This shift towards tokenizing personal information could grant significant influence to the entity managing the ledger, extending control beyond financial transactions to encompass personal identity aspects.
In summary, Pumpius posits that Ripple’s facade of regulatory resistance masked a larger agenda of constructing a global financial network, with the U.S. ensuring seamless integration within its borders. From financial transactions to asset transfers and potential identity data management, XRPL could evolve into a pivotal blockchain tool for state control. Ultimately, he asserts that the lawsuit was not the primary focus; rather, it was a strategic maneuver to advance Ripple’s expansion plans.
