It is no large stretch to say that the blockchain was born out of a distrust of government and an anger at central and private banking, a decentralization putting power into the hands of everyone rather than the few. That being said, after that initial stage, it became a magnet for entrepreneurs and lovers of technology. There are certain types that are attracted to cryptocurrency in its current stage and more and more demographics flock to it as its popularity grows and as people's success from its adoption grows. The repercussions of Satoshi's paper regarding Bitcoin may lead us to a new political climate that the world has never seen.
Money and Control are two tools that run the government. Central Banking achieved both and those with the money have controlled the government through lobbying, legislative reform, etc. since the beginning of its implementation. Those adopting cryptocurrency, with the help of the thousands joining the initiative daily and just learning about cryptocurrency, are joining a new "team" of power, a new "team" of wealth, many of that "team" being a LOT younger and holding far different beliefs than either of the two main parties currently controlling the government.
If the dollar is devalued and a new set of powerful individuals holds all of the newly valuable, exponentially increasing in value currency, then they will now have the keys to the kingdom. We may see new political entities emerge, backed from the shadows, or potentially proudly openly, by crypto-financiers with a vision that many of us who have embraced this culture share. This may begin to create elections where independent candidates not only have a chance, but might even be a common winning party.
If this happens, will that be a good thing, or might it be destabilizing of our government? I can imagine scenarios where the elections turn out to be:
Democrat: 27%, Republican: 29%, X: 30%, Y: 11%, Z: 3%
I imagine a multi-sided seesaw with the a few barren seats gaining an increasing amount of weight as people flock to crypto. Once enough stand on those seats, the seesaw may tip in their favor and the control will shift! There are dangers, though! All changes in government structure have dangers!
I could see an increase in the number of dissatisfied people due to the fact that the percentage of those whose party didn't win would increase. In the example above, 70% of people's parties lost. That being said, it could be argued that the level of dissatisfaction may be less for some due to the winning choice being more likely to have some views shared with a losing party.
What I'd be extremely excited about is an increase in bias in politics toward technological growth. We may have an increasingly technocratic environment, where the great technological minds hold positions of power. Some argue that this is good, others bad. That being said, I'm a fan of this strategy, as my experience has been that those who are technologically savvy are more likely to approach problems logically and that is a strategy that I hold in high regard. I think that something that this scenario is contingent on is that blockchain technology is underestimated by the powers that be until it is too late. If they join the game, they could gain a footing that allows the power structure to remain the same by holding power within the blockchain domain. If they don't underestimate blockchain, nothing may change.
Ripple, temporary ICO bans, and VISA's B2B payment solution, and other things point toward a lessening in the underestimation of blockchain, but we will see how things fare into 2020, when many think that blockchain will have exponentially grown compared to today, some predicting hundreds of thousands of dollars per bitcoin by that time. China, for example, is exploring implementing a national blockchain system/cryptocurrency.