What Fuels ETH’s Monopoly? JPMorgan, SEC, or Its Security, Liquidity?

There have been significant divergent views among prominent figures in the crypto community regarding the underlying reasons for the widespread hostility directed towards Ethereum amid its dominance as the second biggest crypto project.

Liam, a notable community builder, suggested that the animosity towards Ethereum is not due to its lack of functionality but rather stems from its remarkable success. He argued that most developers and users have opted to stick with Ethereum due to its robust security, decentralization, and liquidity. According to Liam, they sidestepped other alternatives despite providing more efficiency and due to concerns of perceived centralization.

On the other hand, Huber, a well-known crypto influencer, proposed a different viewpoint. According to him, Ethereum enjoys monopoly and hate due to the actions of the previous administration of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

Huber claimed that Ethereum’s investors allegedly offered incentives to the SEC, which resulted in the cryptocurrency gaining unique regulatory advantages and providing investors and builders with unprecedented certainty.

Furthermore, Huber insinuated a close relationship between Ethereum co-founder Joe Lubin and SEC officials, suggesting that this perceived connection contributed to Ethereum’s dominance. Also, Huber pointed to the SEC’s perceived monopoly and the influence of capital from JPMorgan as key factors that retain developers and users within the Ethereum ecosystem.

Similarly, a commenter echoed Huber’s sentiments. He argued that Ethereum’s days of dominance in the realm of smart contracts may be numbered. The commenter claimed that a new level playing field is currently under development, potentially facilitated by the perceived failure of the U.S. SEC to provide strong support for Ethereum in the US courts.