Hypothetical: country A unjustly invades country B and steals their bitcoin.
Do you (and your node):
A) reject transactions involving stolen coins & split the chain
OR
B) accept stolen coins to keep chain from splitting.
Maybe invading state will be wise and mix stolen funds to restore coin fungibility so it would be impossible to identify stolen coins. That would probably be best outcome.
Or maybe A won’t invade B because of how easy it is to evade capture with private key material.
I suppose country A could have non-financial incentive for invading, but I think the point is that the financial incentive to invade is diminished (or eliminated) because anyone that custodies ‘properly’ cannot be stolen from. Given your hypothetical, I don’t believe any one country is worth sacrificing the benefits of an immutable, multi-planetary ledger.
