This is the centralization effect: the ego always wants more than the other. Power consolidates over time — the hero becomes the villain. @saylor is facing heavy fire right now from the Bitcoin community — his latest interview got heated, with him getting defensive and interrupting criticism of Bitcoin treasury companies like Strategy. Bitcoiners are calling him out on livestreams/podcasts for dodging tough questions on dilution, mNAV risks, and whether corporate HODLing truly builds the network.

He stopped posting on Primal about a year ago (around late 2024, tied to community tensions highlighted in Jameson Lopp’s note below (most likely many others)

The main issue: both sides are wrong.

Pure HODL culture and self-custody alone isn’t the full way — it’s asceticism.

ETFs and TradFi aren’t the way either — that’s hedonism, since shareholders don’t actually hold the Bitcoin.

The answer is the middle path: full conversion to building the network through genuine self-custody and rejecting fiat spending in daily life.

HODL culture gets cursed with spiritual materialism — attachment to BTC that doesn’t grow the network if you’re hoarding while spending fiat. You cannot serve two masters. Every transaction builds (or weakens) the network you choose.

TradFi/corporate gets cursed with materialism. Players like Strategy lean into fiat wealth — motive is more fiat gains via leverage/debt, not pure Bitcoin adoption. They justify it to take part in the rules of the elites and get approval from the state.

I believe if Saylor recognizes this amid the current attacks and reflects on the ego driving centralization, he could transform the Bitcoin economy for the better. If not, his ego risks destroying him — and dragging the narrative with it.

Christ said: “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

Bitcoin is the kingdom of heaven… not billions in state-issued pseudo-money, nor leveraged corporate proxies.