Senator’s Bitcoin Comments Stir Reactions Across Crypto Community
Australian Senator Gerard Rennick sparked debate after posting a series of statements on X, criticising Bitcoin and questioning its usefulness. In his remarks, Rennick claimed that Bitcoin would eventually reach one million US dollars in price, not because of inherent value, but due to what he described as a Ponzi scheme. He suggested that companies like BlackRock would continue funnelling money into Bitcoin, driving up its price in a market with limited supply.
Rennick went on to question the real-world output of Bitcoin, stating it produces “absolutely nothing.” He added that the activity of buying and selling Bitcoin contributes no tangible benefit to society. His criticism extended to the broader economy, where he called for more support for traditional engineering and public infrastructure rather than what he referred to as “financial engineering.” He closed his post with the statement, “You can’t eat Bitcoin.”
These comments quickly drew responses from members of the crypto industry, journalists, and everyday users.
Image 1: Bitcoin (Source: BusinessLIVE)
Pushback from the Industry and Public
One of the early replies came from Laura Shin, a journalist known for her reporting on cryptocurrency and blockchain technology. She replied to Rennick on X, noting that the internet also cannot be eaten, yet is widely accepted and essential in today’s society. Her response was brief but aimed at highlighting the flaw in comparing digital innovations to physical needs.
The Australian Bitcoin Industry Body (ABIB) also issued a statement in response to Rennick’s post. The group criticised the senator’s take on Bitcoin, saying it reflected a misunderstanding of both the technology and its role in modern finance. They urged lawmakers to engage seriously with Bitcoin and to better understand how it is already being used by Australians—not just to buy or sell, but to support innovation and strengthen long-term economic resilience.
ABIB warned that dismissing Bitcoin based on misinformation or lack of awareness could lead to poor policymaking. They also raised concerns about the actions of major banks, accusing them of unfairly delaying or blocking legal transactions related to Bitcoin. According to the group, this represents a more serious policy failure than Bitcoin’s existence.
In defending the role of Bitcoin in Australia, ABIB pointed out that the technology is already contributing to the local energy market, helping to reduce consumer electricity costs and deliver essential services like frequency control. They added that Bitcoin is opening access to financial tools globally and helping to reduce energy poverty through market-based incentives.
They ended their statement by calling on politicians to engage in meaningful conversations about the technology and its benefits.
Senator Doubles Down
In response to the backlash, Senator Rennick maintained his position. He dismissed the need to explain his views further and criticised the Bitcoin community for seeking validation from politicians. In his words, it was “pathetic” that those who claim to value decentralisation would rely on the approval of elected officials.
Rennick added that while technology and innovation may have merit, his concerns lie with what he sees as manipulation in the currency side of crypto. He clarified that he did not suggest technologies like artificial intelligence or blockchain were passing fads, but rather questioned the financial systems built around them.
Members of the public and the wider crypto community continued to push back. One user from the group Coinvision responded by expressing regret for voting for the senator, accusing him of being out of touch with emerging trends. The post implied that both artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency are not short-term trends but lasting changes in how the world operates.
Rennick replied to this post as well, stating that he had never suggested either AI or crypto would fade away. He repeated his belief that technology should be distinguished from what he described as currency manipulation.
Image 2: Senator Gerard Rennick: (Source: The Australian)
Broader Pattern of Political Friction
The exchange follows a broader trend where government officials face criticism from the crypto community for decisions seen as hostile to Bitcoin. Just weeks earlier, Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs vetoed a bill that would have allowed the state to include Bitcoin in its official reserves. That decision triggered a wave of backlash from crypto advocates.
Jameson Lopp, co-founder of Casa and an early figure in the cypherpunk movement, commented that the move would not age well. Bitcoin investor Anthony Pompliano questioned the idea that politicians should be making investment decisions at all. Crypto lawyer Andrew
Gordon added that more politicians are needed who understand that Bitcoin and crypto are part of the future.
The community has also reacted strongly to other recent government actions. One example was the United States’ decision to move $1.9 billion worth of Bitcoin to Coinbase in December 2024.
Despite the scepticism, Bitcoin has recently surged in value, trading close to $112,000, adding more weight to the ongoing conversation about its relevance and potential.
