Internet Security

Did The SEC’s Gary Gensler Threaten Crypto And DeFi In The WaPo Interview?

Published 5 years ago in 29th October 2021

By John

Did The SEC’s Gary Gensler Threaten Crypto And DeFi In The WaPo Interview?

Come on, Gary Gensler didn’t threaten the industry. Of course he didn’t, but… maybe he did? If a mafia boss repeated the exact same words, there would be no doubt. And we’re quoting him verbatim. This is exactly what the Securities Exchange Commission’s Chairman told The Washington Post. They had Gary Gensler as a guest in their “The Path Forward” series. The host was David Ignatius. They talked about “those five- or six thousand projects” that are “raising money from the public.” Related Reading | Erik Voorhees: Selling Unregistered Securities is a Made up Crime Yesterday, we focused on Gary Gensler’s comments about stablecoins and Evergrande. Today, the topic is fighting words… or are they? Read what he had to say and decide for yourself. Gary Gensler Lures Crypto With Honey And Vinegar The topic of the day, of course, is, are cryptocurrencies securities? And the head of the Securities Exchange Commission appeals to the exchanges and related platforms instead of aiming at the projects themselves. Interesting strategy. Gary Gensler explains: “If these tokens–and there’s five- or six thousand different projects–if these tokens have the attributes of an investment contract or a note, or have attributes of equities or bonds. And in essence, one of the core issues is that there are platforms: trading platforms where you can buy and sell these tokens; lending platforms, where you can earn a return on these tokens that have not just dozens of tokens but sometimes hundreds or thousands of tokens. And it’s highly likely that they have on these platforms, securities, investment contracts, or notes or others, that fit the definition of security. Those platforms should come in, they should figure out how to register, be an investment–investor protection remit.” Well, good luck with that. What will happen if people don’t obey your organization’s mandate, Mr. Gensler? “I do really fear that we’ll keep bringing these enforcement cases, but there’s going to be a problem. There’s going to be a problem on lending platforms or trading platforms. And frankly, when that happens, I think a lot of people are going to get hurt.” We’re not saying that Gary Gensler is threatening you. He’s obviously speaking about the risks of unregulated markets. However, “there’s going to be a problem” and “a lot of people are going to get hurt.” That’s what the man said. Gary Gensler (SEC):– is going after the “5000 or 6000 PROJECTS that are raising money from the public [..] anticipating profit”– views #Bitcoin as a “digital, scarce STORE OF VALUE”https://t.co/aw9aQwQ0M6 — PlanB (@100trillionUSD) September 21, 2021 The Definition Of Investment Contract Here, Gensler is speaking directly to host David Ignatius: “If you, David, ask some of the listeners from this program to give them your money, something of value. And they were relying on you, David, with maybe five or ten other entrepreneurs and computer scientists to build a platform–build a platform, that token and so forth, and they were giving it to you with an anticipation of profits. Our Supreme Court long ago said that’s an investment contract.” And it’s hard to argue with that. However, it sounds threatening when you mix it with this: “So, public money has a certain place around the globe. Private monies usually don’t last that long. So, I don’t think there’s a long-term viability for five- or six thousand private forms of money. History tells us otherwise. So, in the meantime, I think it’s worthwhile to have an investor protection regime placed around this.” The newspapers went with that phrase, “I don’t think there’s a long-term viability for five- or six thousand private forms of money,” for their headlines. The markets tumbled. Some people argued that, in context, the phrase wasn’t that menacing. Maybe, but, if you mix it with something like this: “And I think at $2 trillion, 5- or 6,000 projects, that it would be better to be inside investor-consumer protection, inside the tax compliance and anti-money laundering and financial stability.” A crystal clear picture of the SEC’s intentions and politics emerges. 🤯 pic.twitter.com/XUlSV31jEw — Eduardo Prospero (@edprospero23) September 23, 2021 What Does Gary Gensler Think About Bitcoin? According to the Securities Exchange Commission, Bitcoin is a commodity. Its unique characteristics make it so. Also, there’s Gary Gensler’s reverence for Satoshi Nakamoto and the fact that he taught a cryptocurrencies class at MIT. Because of all that, Bitcoiners seem to feel like they’re exempt from the SEC’s wrath. Are they, though? When host David Ignatius asked about Bitcoin’s effectiveness as a store of value, Gary Gensler answered: “I mean, holding a highly volatile asset–bitcoin is that. It’s a digital, scarce, I would even say speculative store of value. To hold appropriate capital, if it’s on a bank’s balance sheet, which seemed to fit into the remit that we’ve had in the past, that there be appropriate shock absorbers against the potential loss.” That doesn’t sound like a Satoshi Nakamoto fan. Or like he appreciates Bitcoin at all. Flat out, what do you think about Bitcoin as an innovation Mr. Gensler? “I think it’s been a catalyst for change. Nakamoto-san’s innovation, not only bitcoin as the first sort of one but this whole distributed ledger technology has been a catalyst for change that, around the globe, central banks and the private sector are looking in on how we can enhance our payment systems, and enhancing our payment systems to make them 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, real time, at lower cost.” He did everything but say “Blockchain, not Bitcoin.” That slogan might’ve been phased out, but apparently, the idea remains. That’s actually what presumed pro-crypto regulator Gary Gensler thinks that Bitcoin brought to the world. A catalyst for the central banks and the private sector to step up their game. Wow. Related Reading | This Is What Gensler’s Confirmation Could Mean For XRP BTC price chart for 09/23/2021 on Bitstamp | Source: BTC/USD on TradingView.com And What’s His Position On Decentralized Lending? You’re not going to believe what this man thinks about DeFi lending. According to Gary Gensler: “It’s raising new and interesting innovations around how exchanges work and how even potentially some forms of decentralized lending. We’ve had peer-to-peer lending for 15-20 years, we’ve experimented with it. This is a new type of experiment. So, those, I think, are really interesting innovations challenging the established business models.” Oh. That’s actually a fair description of the phenomenon. Never mind, then. Carry on. Featured Image: Screenshoot from video interview | Charts by TradingView
Read More

Be the first to write a comment.

How a national security threat label has reignited Indonesia’s LGBTQ debate

Advertisement Asia How a national security threat label has reignited Indonesia’s LGBTQ debate Indonesia last October classified the “spread of LGBTQ culture” as one of the country’s non-military threats. A series of developments thrust the provision into the public eye this month, sparking a debate. A street vendor walks past a banner reading ‘Indonesia

Published 1 week ago in 28th July 2026

Asia

How a national security threat label has reignited Indonesia’s LGBTQ debate

Indonesia last October classified the “spread of LGBTQ culture” as one of the country’s non-military threats. A series of developments thrust the provision into the public eye this month, sparking a debate.

New: You can now listen to articles.

This audio is generated by an AI tool.

Ericssen

SINGAPORE: For more than eight months, a provision tucked away in an Indonesian presidential regulation on national defence drew little public attention.

In an appendix to Presidential Regulation No. 111/2025 on the General National Defence Policy signed in October last year, the government classified the “spread of LGBTQ culture” as one of the country’s non-military threats.

The clause, referring to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual and queer culture, appeared alongside a range of other threats deemed capable of affecting national resilience. They included illegal trafficking, natural resource theft, terrorism, atheism and radicalism.

A presidential regulation is a legally binding regulation published in the State Gazette, while General National Defence Policy documents are highly technical and usually attract little public attention outside government and defence circles.

But a series of developments thrust the provision into the public eye this month, sparking a debate on the place of LGBTQ issues in state policy and the extent to which social issues should be framed within Indonesia’s defence strategy.

The issue quickly spread beyond social media into mainstream Indonesian media with national outlets including Antara, Kumparan, and Tempo examining the regulation and prompting public responses from senior government officials.

Some observers and activists say the clause could heighten discrimination against LGBTQ individuals in society, even as Indonesian ministers have defended the regulation while saying the government has no intention of curtailing the fundamental rights of citizens.

“As Indonesian citizens, LGBTQ people are entitled to education, employment, healthcare and other public services without restrictions, segregation or discrimination,” Indonesia’s Human Rights Minister Natalius Pigai told CNA in a phone interview.

CNA Games

Guess Word

Crack the word, one row at a time

Buzzword

Create words using the given letters

Mini Sudoku

Tiny puzzle, mighty brain teaser

Mini Crossword

Small grid, big challenge

Word Search

Spot as many words as you can

Show Less

Indonesia’s Human Rights Minister Natalius Pigai. (Photo courtesy of Human Rights Ministry)

But he added that Indonesian society is not ready to accept the LGBTQ community, even as the state remains obliged to respect, protect and fulfil every citizen’s rights to education, employment, healthcare and public services.

“The time has not yet come to formally recognise them as an official group because society is not yet ready to accept them,” he said.

HOW THE CLAUSE CAME TO PUBLIC ATTENTION

While it remains unclear what first drew widespread attention to the provision, it resurfaced amid a series of developments involving LGBTQ issues. One was a Pride Month-themed social media post in mid-June by Suara Mahasiswa, a student publication at the University of Indonesia.

The post had led to a heated online debate, with critics arguing it was inconsistent with Indonesia’s religious and social norms. They questioned why it invoked the Pancasila national ideology to defend the LGBTQ community. Pancasila comprises five principles: Belief in one God, civilised humanity, national unity, democracy and social justice.

The backlash prompted the university to publicly distance itself from the post and launch an internal review.

Then in late June, the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) said it was preparing an academic paper and a draft bill to criminalise LGBTQ-related conduct for Parliament’s National Legislation Programme.

MUI deputy chairman Muhammad Cholil Nafis argued that moral appeals alone were no longer sufficient to curb what he described as the growing activities and campaign surrounding LGBTQ culture.

“If there are no legal penalties at all, it eventually becomes normal. We should not normalise it. Punishment helps people understand that it is not normal,” he said.

“Deviant activities, such as same-sex parties, are now increasingly being displayed openly in public without any sense of shame,” he added.

Scrutiny then shifted to the new regulation that had previously gone largely unnoticed.

The belated attention came as no surprise to Agus Wahyudi, head of the Inter-Religious Studies Programme at Gadjah Mada University (UGM) in Yogyakarta.

Documents such as the General National Defence Policy typically circulate within government bureaucracy and rarely become the subject of public debate, he said.

But a provision can take on political significance when a series of events – in this case, the Pride Month-themed social media post and the MUI’s planned bill – draws the public’s notice, said Agus.

“What changed was not necessarily the policy itself, but the public attention it attracted,” Agus said.

WHY WAS IT PLACED IN A NATIONAL DEFENCE DOCUMENT?

Asked whether the presidential regulation represented the first national policy to explicitly mention LGBTQ, human rights lawyer Asfinawati said Indonesia’s 2008 Pornography Law referred to “lesbian” and “homosexual” acts in its explanatory notes to a provision banning the production, distribution and sale of pornographic material.

It defined what the law described as “deviant sexual intercourse” for the purposes of pornography offences, rather than creating a standalone offence based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

Presidential Regulation No. 111/2025 goes further by classifying the “spread of LGBTQ culture” itself as a non-military threat, argued Asfinawati, the former chair of the Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation.

“This regulation no longer links it to sexual conduct. Simply having a particular sexual orientation or gender identity is placed within a threat framework,” she said.

Experts have questioned whether a national defence framework was an appropriate instrument for addressing issues such as sexual orientation and gender identity.

In principle, national defence should focus on military threats, said Tangguh Chairil, a lecturer in security studies at the Department of International Relations at Binus University, Jakarta.

Indonesia, however, classifies threats into three categories: Military, non-military and hybrid. As a result, issues beyond the traditional defence sphere are increasingly viewed as national security issues.

“Because the definition is so broad, almost anything can be treated as a national security threat,” Tangguh told CNA.

Classifying LGBTQ culture as a non-military threat under a defence framework means the issue may be treated as a security concern requiring state attention and resources, he added.

“Issues that have been successfully securitised tend to receive greater attention than others,” he said.

Yusril Ihza Mahendra, Coordinating Minister for Legal Affairs, Human Rights, Immigration, and Corrections, told news outlet Tempo on Jul 9 that “non-military threat” was used to categorise risks against national resilience.

In the socio-cultural context, “resilience” refers to values, ethics, character of the younger generation, families, digital space, and social cohesion, he said.

“What the government perceives as a threat is the campaign, propaganda, and dissemination of LGBT behaviour aimed at altering the values that align with the nation’s culture and morality,” he added.

Indonesia’s Chief Minister for Law and Human Rights, Yusril Ihza Mahendra, speaks as Australia’s Minister for Home Affairs, Tony Burke, listens during a press conference following their meeting in Jakarta, Indonesia, December 3, 2024. (REUTERS/Willy Kurniawan)

Asfinawati said the regulation cannot serve as the legal basis for introducing new criminal provisions or for regional governments to impose criminal sanctions unless authorised by law.

Under Indonesian law, a person’s sexual orientation as well as consensual same-sex relations between adults are not, by themselves, criminal offences. The exception is Aceh province, which implements Islamic crimina

Internet Security

Nigeria: UNICEF chief urges child protection amid security, humanitarian crises

Violence in Nigeria The head of the U.N. children’s agency visited northwestern Nigeria on Friday as conflict, poverty and rising food insecurity leave millions of children in the region in need of aid. Catherine Russell, executive director of UNICEF, toured the state of Sokoto, where the agency is seeking to draw attention to worsening humanitarian

Published 2 weeks ago in 25th July 2026

Nigeria: UNICEF chief urges child protection amid security, humanitarian crises

Violence in Nigeria

The head of the U.N. children’s agency visited northwestern Nigeria on Friday as conflict, poverty and rising food insecurity leave millions of children in the region in need of aid.

Catherine Russell, executive director of UNICEF, toured the state of Sokoto, where the agency is seeking to draw attention to worsening humanitarian challenges facing children.

She met with state officials and visited UNICEF-supported programs aimed at improving the health of both mothers and children and protecting vulnerable youngsters.

“We have to make sure that children are protected in these conflicts,” she said.

“That their healthcare is protected, that their food is protected, that their education is protected. Children can’t waste years of their life because conflicts are going on.”

Northern Nigeria is already gripped by an intensifying security crisis that has killed thousands.

The ongoing Middle East conflict has deepened food insecurity for millions living in poverty, making children in poor households more vulnerable.

According to UNICEF between 18.3 million and 23.4 million more children in monetarily poor households worldwide have fallen into deeper poverty, including 6.5 million to 8.8 million in Africa.

Nigeria has one of the world’s largest populations of impoverished children, and humanitarian organizations warn that those in the country’s conflict-torn north remain among the most vulnerable.

For some, UNICEF-supported programs have made a tangible difference.

Zainab Bello, 19, said she had been out of school before joining the agency’s “Digital Village” program.

“I was taught digital literacy… how to use a digital tool,” she said.

“I also learned how I can promote my vocational skills on various social media platforms.”