Comment / Author: Pu Pu / 1 2 Dec, 2025

—Reflecting on Mr. Zhu Weisha's (Similarities and Differences Between Company and Crypto Community Mechanisms) and (Speculations on Trump's Token Issuance)

The emergence of Trump's token made the world realize for the first time: cryptocurrency can not only generate wealth through trading but also become politicians' 'nuclear weapons'. When Trump's 770,000 token holders form a real-time interactive digital community, this group is no longer just simple 'fans'—they hold tokens, can support their idol with real money, vote through price fluctuations to express their stance, and may even use community power to force policy adjustments. Once this model matures, future U.S. presidents may no longer need campaign teams but can directly bind voters through 'token issuance'.

1. Political change: from 'Twitter governance' to 'community governance'

Trump once stirred global public opinion with a tweet; now he attempts to reconstruct political game rules with Trump's token. According to on-chain data, 36.5% of Trump token holders are profitable, meaning over 300,000 people have made money by supporting Trump—this binding of interests is far more solid than just shouting slogans for votes. If the Trump team deeply integrates token issuance and crypto community building with the presidential election (for example, token holders enjoy priority for policy suggestions, airdrop election-related NFTs, or even use tokens to exchange for offline event tickets), this community will become a precise political machine.

More critically, the essence of the cryptocurrency community is 'voting with money'. In traditional elections, voters only vote once every four years; but in the Trump token community, the rise and fall of the token price is a real-time opinion poll. If the token price crashes, the team must immediately adjust its strategy, or token holders will 'vote with their feet' by selling tokens. This pressure far exceeds traditional polls, as it is directly related to real monetary interests.

Imagine: if all presidential candidates in the U.S. in 2028 issue personal tokens, voters purchasing tokens would be seen as 'political crowdfunding', and the amount of tokens held would determine a candidate's fundraising capability and public influence—politics will completely devolve into a 'token war', and ordinary people holding tokens will finally have leverage against traditional parties.

For specific research, please refer to Mr. Zhu Weisha's article:

1. Speculations on Trump's Token Issuance - Looking at the Valuation Logic Behind Meme Tokens from Trump's Token Issuance (Part One) – (chainless.hk)

2. Speculations on Trump's Token Issuance - Looking at the Valuation Logic Behind Meme Tokens from Trump's Token Issuance (Part Two) – (chainless.hk)

2. The Twilight of Company Mechanisms: When 'Shareholders' Become 'Token Holders'

The mechanism of traditional companies is a precise but bulky machine, still stuck in the mechanisms of industrial age production relations. Adam Smith's theory of national wealth: division of labor, centralized hierarchical management is suited to the industrial age's production methods: strategies set by the CEO, orders executed by employees, users passively consume.

The crypto community, on the other hand, resembles a tropical rainforest: no central control, developers, miners, and users spontaneously collaborate through token interests, evolving an unexpected ecosystem.

Bitcoin has demonstrated the terrifying efficiency of 'leaderless organizations':

1. There is no board of directors, but global developers voluntarily maintain the code;

2. There are no KPIs, but miners compete to buy mining machines to maintain network security;

3. There is no marketing department, but token holders voluntarily promote Bitcoin—because every coin they hold is 'equity'.

What else do we need from bicycles? What else do we need from management? This is the momentum after interests are bound, the tremendous social energy brought about by anti-centralized exploitation.

In contrast, traditional companies: Meta (formerly Facebook) spends billions of dollars annually to manage 30,000 employees, while Bitcoin's maintenance cost is almost zero. When the Trump token community gathers 770,000 token holders in one month, the customer network that traditional companies took ten years to build seems clumsy.

Currently, I personally feel that the future business world will first split into two major species:

1. Traditional companies: continue to produce physical products such as mobile phones and cars, relying on factories and supply chains;

2. Crypto communities: dominate the internet, finance, and cultural industries, relying on tokens to allocate power.

In the end, the first type of species may also disappear, leaving only the second type.

Taking Meituan as an example:

We have all heard a joke: 'The platform does evil, delivery workers are always trapped in the system, risking their lives to deliver food.' Algorithms determine their delivery times, routes, and income, and they have no voice. But if Meituan implements community management, delivery workers can become 'shareholders' of the platform by holding tokens, allowing them to vote on delivery rules, profit-sharing ratios, and even dismiss incompetent managers. This model not only frees delivery workers from the fate of 'algorithm slaves' but also allows them to share in the platform's growth dividends. The profit growth and momentum of the delivery platform will be larger and more direct, eliminating ineffective management layers and saving significant expenses.

Three, Ultimate Disruption: How Cryptocurrency Restructures Human Society?

The ultimate ambition of cryptocurrency is to become a new 'operating system' for human society. It can overturn the old order with 'three lines of code':

1. Kill the middleman.

African farmers receive remittances from European customers in USDT, with fees reduced from 20% to 1%; Iran uses Bitcoin to bypass dollar sanctions and sells oil to India; gamers trade equipment with NFTs, no longer subject to a 30% platform cut; cryptocurrencies are globally strangling the 'intermediary rent-seeking class', allowing value to flow back to 'peer-to-peer'.

2. Restructure the power structure.

In traditional society, power = violence + money. But in the crypto world, power = code + consensus. When Myanmar guerrillas use Bitcoin to purchase supplies, when Russian hackers use Monero for payments, when ordinary people manage community funds with DAOs (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations)—the machinery of violence loses its monopoly for the first time.

3. Create parallel societies.

In Decentraland (a decentralized virtual world), users purchase land, open casinos, and hold concerts using cryptocurrencies; in the Aave lending protocol, anyone can pledge tokens for loans without bank approval; on the Gitcoin platform, developers receive rewards for code contributions... In these simple activities, there are no presidents, no CEOs, no nationalities; where centralized governance is not needed, centralization should disappear. Everything is driven by mathematical rules and community voting.

Take a crowdfunding example in scientific research:

Assuming a medical research team needs funding to develop anti-cancer drugs, they can issue 'anti-cancer tokens' to raise funds from global investors. Token holders are not only investors but can also vote on research directions and funding allocations through community voting. If the drug development succeeds, token holders will share in the patent profits; if it fails, the community can vote to terminate the project. This model removes the dependence of scientific research on government grants or venture capital funding, and instead is driven by ordinary people around the world.

Four, Comparison between Companies and Crypto Communities: The Transformation of Future Social Structure

Mr. Zhu Weisha points out in (Similarities and Differences Between Company and Crypto Community Mechanisms) that the essential difference between traditional companies and crypto communities lies in power distribution and governance models. I have made a comparison in a table:

The dimensional company crypto community management model is controlled by the board and management, shareholders vote by community token holders, the core team's management profit model relies on product sales, shareholder dividends through rising token prices, the ecosystem profit organizational structure is a pyramid structure, clearly hierarchical and decentralized, equal collaborative decision-making mechanism decided by top-level decisions, employee execution determined by token holder votes, community execution incentive mechanism salary + equity tokens + voting rights transparency company finances relatively closed, all transactions and governance can be viewed on-chain.

Mr. Zhu Weisha believes that the rise of crypto communities will fundamentally change the future social structure:

1. Decentralization of power: Traditional companies rely on a few executives for decision-making, while the crypto community distributes power to all token holders. This model is not only fairer but also fosters more innovation.

2. Shared interests: The profits of traditional companies mainly flow to shareholders, while crypto communities share profits with all participants through tokens. This mechanism gives ordinary people the chance to become 'capitalists' for the first time.

3. Transparent governance: The finances and decisions of traditional companies are often opaque, while all transaction and governance records in crypto communities are publicly accessible. This transparency will greatly reduce corruption and the abuse of power.

In the future, the crypto community may become the mainstream organizational form of society. From scientific projects to charitable funds, from artistic creation to political campaigns, any field that requires cooperation can achieve efficient operation through tokens and community governance.

For specific research, please refer to Mr. Zhu Weisha's article:

1. Similarities and differences between company and crypto community mechanisms (one) – (chainless.hk)

2. Similarities and Differences Between Company and Crypto Community Mechanisms (Part Two) – (chainless.hk)

3. Similarities and differences between company and crypto community mechanisms (three) – (chainless.hk)

Five, finally, I want to say: either participate or exit.

As Trump binds voters with tokens, as Bitcoin miners roar in Africa and the United States, as young people buy homes with BTC earnings - the world has already split into two camps:

1. Understanding the accelerated evolution of people in the decentralized era.
2. Those who cling to the old order are gradually marginalized.

Ordinary people do not need to become technical experts, but must understand two trends:

Power is flowing from 'institutions' to 'communities': holding tokens = owning equity, participating in the community = holding discourse power;

Value is shifting from 'physical' to 'consensus': Bitcoin has no factories or employees, but its market value exceeds Coca-Cola; Trump's token has no products or profits, but its valuation crushes traditional media companies.

Cryptocurrency is not a magic trick that turns stones into gold, but a social experiment. It may fail, it may be stifled by regulation, but it cannot be ignored—because the stakes of this experiment are the next century of human civilization.


https://chainless.hk/zh-hans/2025/02/01/%e5%8a%a0%e5%af%86%e8%b4%a7%e5%b8%81%ef%bc%9a%e6%ad%a3%e5%9c%a8%e9%a2%a0%e8%a6%86%e4%b8%96%e7%95%8c%e7%9a%84%e9%9a%90%e5%bd%a2%e6%9d%83%e5%8a%9b/