Are Stablecoins and Starlink the quiet revolutions of this decade? Two technical breakthroughs that at first glance have nothing to do with each other, but do share a deep similarity: they undermine the foundations of existing, national systems. True globalization, in other words. Where Starlink blurs national borders and national control over communications, Stablecoins do the same with money and financial power. Both put established institutions out of action and give citizens around the world new tools. And therein lies their disruptive power.
Until now, "digitization" often meant digitizing existing processes and organizations: paper forms became PDFs, physical counters became Web sites and banking transactions became Internet banking. Convenient, but it remained essentially the same world - only faster and more efficient.
Stablecoin and Starlink mark a fundamentally different moment. This is the real breakthrough of digitization: a new world that is possible because we have now digitized so much. No longer a digital layer over old processes, but completely new structures - digital native - that replace the traditional world. The difference between 'digitized' existing processes and systems versus a completely new digital reality.
A Stablecoin is a digital currency linked to a stable value - usually the U.S. dollar, but sometimes the euro or gold. Unlike Bitcoin or Ethereum, the goal of Stablecoin is precisely guaranteed stability: one digital dollar is guaranteed to remain worth a dollar. Stablecoins are the bridge between traditional financial systems supported by national banks and the borderless, global world of crypto-currencies and blockchain.
Instead of a bank account at a local bank, you need a smartphone and Internet connection. With that, you can receive, store and send digital dollars - regardless of which country you live in or which bank you (don't) trust. So with the advent of digital SIM cards (eSIMs) and international providers providing data worldwide, even the role of telecom companies is becoming less relevant. Like banks, they too are losing their position as national gatekeepers. Companies like Starlink, Airalo and Helium are international digital-first alternatives that provide direct access to networks - without the intervention of national parties.
The power of Stablecoins becomes apparent when you look at the tangible benefits:
Financial inclusion: Billions of people worldwide do not have access to a bank account. For them, a Stablecoin wallet on their phone suddenly offers the ability to receive money, save and make payments. A digital dollar is more reliable than the local currency or a corrupt bank in many countries.
Cross-border trade: For small business owners, international trade is often expensive and cumbersome. Stablecoins make it possible to receive payments directly worldwide without high exchange fees or unreliable middlemen.
Protection against inflation: In countries like Venezuela, Turkey or Nigeria, savings evaporate at lightning speed due to hyperinflation. A Stablecoin linked to the dollar offers people protection and security - literally life-saving.
Digital sovereignty: Stablecoins give individuals direct control over their own assets, without depending on banks or states. This opens up opportunities, but at the same time puts geopolitical relations on edge.
Another crucial aspect is that transactions with Stablecoins are peer-to-peer. Users exchange value directly among themselves using a blockchain as a digital accounting system, without the intervention of a bank. These payments are lightning fast and have virtually no transaction costs. This removes the most important earnings model of banks: collecting fees on payments and international transfers. And therefore also the control thereof.
Banks are watching with suspicion to Stablecoins. Their traditional role as gatekeepers of cash flows is being eroded and their revenue streams are under pressure. Governments also see Stablecoins as a threat, because payments regain a form of anonymity reminiscent of old-fashioned cash. As a result, not only banks but also states are losing their grip on payments - and thus on supervision, tax collection and control.
This development is not limited to communications and payments. Sovereignty is becoming increasingly digital. Estonia is leading the way here: the country offers digital citizenship without physically living in Estonia. This makes it possible to access government services, business registration and even the European market as a "virtual Estonian citizen.
Even more recently, Malta officially accepts DAOs (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations) at their Chamber of Commerce as legally valid, digital companies. By doing so, an EU member state recognizes organizations that exist completely digitally and autonomously - regardless of traditional state borders. The contrast is stark, as elsewhere within the EU, on the contrary, there is great political reservation about digital identities, currencies and companies outside of national control.
With Stablecoins comes the question: which currency will eventually become the carrier of this new system? For now, that is the U.S. dollar. Most Stablecoins are dollar-backed, and as long as the U.S. has deep capital markets, military clout and geopolitical influence, that position will remain strong. Yet we are seeing cracks in that dominance.
China is pushing the yuan step by step toward internationalization, including its own digital variant, the e-CNY. The first concrete step toward political acceptance of Stablecoins was just back in the US. Trump set the door ajar to recognize Stablecoins. He understands the geopolitical importance for the U.S. and especially for the dollar: better to keep the U.S. currency dominant in digital form than to lose that power to competitors.
The euro lacks the appeal of the dollar due to political fragmentation and lack of military and geopolitical power. The old ECU - a basket of strong national currencies - was a more robust instrument than the current euro, a political compromise that did not fully meet the national needs of any European country. The ECU did offer that space and flexibility and thus provided stability. In retrospect, the EEC as an economic association of countries with their own currencies and geopolitics, was better than today's EU: an expensive powerless "union" of countries, a technocratic juggernaut with little geopolitical clout.
Zooming out even further, we see that the dominance of financial powers and currencies is rarely eternal. Historically viewed, such hegemonies often last around 250 years: states, families, banks and networks that financially dominate the world order eventually lose their position. Around 250 years ago, American and thus dollar dominance began, with large banking families in the background. That cycle is coming to an end. It fits the pattern of long wave movements that is also visible in economics (Kondratieff) and geopolitics. Stablecoins could therefore not be just another technical innovation, but a signal that a new financial era is emerging.
"The paradox is clear: For citizens, stablecoins mean freedom, security and inclusion. For states and institutions, they mean loss of acquired power and control. The big question is how this tension will evolve in the coming years."
