Changan no longer: When the on-chain agreement becomes new Xianyang

Author: Liu Honglin

During the May Day holiday, I drove by the Hexi Corridor and drove all the way eastward to Xianyang.

Standing here, you will unconsciously recall the familiar names in textbooks -Banliangqian, Wuzhuqian, Chang'an, the Han envoys of the Western Regions... If the Silk Road is a channel for exchange of civilizations, then Xianyang is the starting point behind it - not only the starting point of the Silk Road, but also the origin of the imperial value order.

Xianyang’s role in history is the initiator of the system. It is not only the capital of the Qin Empire, but also the starting point of a complete system of "unifying measurement, regulating credit, and organizing the circulation of value." What we are talking about today seems to be a technological innovation, but in fact it is still an old question: who will issue currency, how to set the price, and how to maintain the value consensus?

"Chengqin"'s stablecoin: practical to suppress everything

After Qin unified the six countries, the first thing he did was not to expand taxation, but to standardize - unify weights and measures, unified writing, and of course, also including currency. The launch of "half-liang coins" is a national integration of the currency format and value standards, and it is also a credit endorsement established based on administrative power.

The Han Dynasty further improved this structure. In the early years of the Western Han Dynasty, the currency system was reformed many times, and finally established the "Wuzhu Coin" as the national currency. Through border trading and gold settlement mechanisms, the currency system promoted the currency system to serve foreign trade, forming the bottom layer of the Silk Road.

Looking at stablecoins today, the logic is actually very close. USDT is even considered to be more stable than local fiat currencies in many countries and regions. It is not because it is more politically strong, but because it has wider circulation, more transparent credit, and lower transaction costs.

You said this is not a "Xianyang-level" functional node? It has no borders, but has exchange rates; it has no emperor, but has tacit understanding of the market.

Coins such as USDT and USDC do not rely on computing power or "decentralized" beliefs. They rely on anchoring, auditing, custody and liquidation efficiency. Behind these elements, there is actually a system, but it is not a national system, but a new version of the combination of on-chain standards, business consensus and quasi-regulation.

This "new type of Xianyang" is no longer maintained by Terracotta Warriors, city walls and edicts, but is driven by the on-chain address, circulation agreement and the trading habit of "you transfer money and I admit it". It may not be legal, but it is indeed practical; it may not be stable, but it is a solution that most people can use in reality.

Its advantage is that it does not "fight against all centers" like Bitcoin, but selectively undertakes the old system and connects with financial infrastructure, so as to quickly become the mainstream in cross-border payments, gray finance, exchange rate hedging and other scenarios.

In other words, it is not born for expression, but for use; it is not a bargaining chip for the ideal country, but an interface to the real world. It is like the "Wuzhu coins" in the digital age, which emphasizes efficiency, compatibility and universality - this is not a resistance to the old order, but a digital replication of the system.

"Anti-Qin" Bitcoin: Fighting against the Center

The logic of Bitcoin is almost completely opposite to the system.

It does not recognize the state, does not set up a center, and does not require you to "believe" any institution. What it wants is precisely "trust" - don't believe that everyone says it and who prints it true. The rules are written in the code and verified on the entire network, no one can change it. Consensus depends on computing power, order depends on rules, with extreme logic and cold principles.

This design is not a slap in the head, it reflects a response to the long-term operation of the centralized monetary system. And this problem is not uncommon in history.

The finances were tight in the late Qin Dynasty, and the court quietly reduced the weight of "half a tael of coins". It seemed that the currency had not changed, but the actual shrinkage was severe, the market currency value fluctuated, and the people's trust collapsed. "Records of the Grand Historian: Pingzhuan Shu" mentions that "money is not equal, and the people do not believe it." It can be seen that once the central credit is shaken, the entire currency system will also be shaken.

The same was true in the early Han Dynasty. Although the central government has tried to unify the right to mint coins, local private minting is prevalent and its execution is insufficient. "Han Shu·Food and Message" writes that "many people mint money privately, but they are prohibited but not stopped." The currency types are mixed and the standards are different. The private trading system is almost in a state of self-operation. In "A Preliminary Study on the Mistakes of Monetary Policy in the Han Dynasty", Li Zuojun pointed out that the concentration and implementation of coin rights have resulted in idle credit in the country and the failure of the system.

Bitcoin is a thorough technical reaction under the problem of "credit overflow

• system inability to control". It is not trying to strengthen the center, but trying to cancel it: it does not rely on the country, does not rely on commercial credit, but only on hard constraints of rules.

It is indeed not suitable for high-frequency payments, has large price fluctuations, and it is difficult to enter daily life. But it does not serve the mainstream, it is to protect the edge - in the scenes of financial crisis, hyperinflation, and political turmoil, it has its unique "security".

It is not for easy use, but for escape; it is not for smoother system, but for room for room for complete loss of control.

After Xianyang: Freedom of choice

All generations of Qin have practiced the political and legal laws. To a certain extent, we can say that "Bitcoin is anti-Qin, and stablecoins are inheriting Qin." Bitcoin is a deep distrust of “the center will be corrupt”, and stablecoins are a realistic response to “the system needs to evolve.”

History has long proved that the currency that can truly circulate stably is never because of "everyone likes it", but because of "the system can support it". The reason why the system can be supported is not because of ideals, but rules, governance and compatibility. Whether you rely on government orders to mint coins or write chains by code, the mechanism that "most people recognize" is the "original origin" where you are.

Now, those institutional origins have been transferred from Changan and Washington to Tether clearing addresses, USDC audit reports, EVM compatible interfaces, or on-chain stablecoin contracts recognized by global users.

Qin's legacy is still there, but it has changed from a city to an agreement. The choice to inherit or anti-Qin is actually the choice made by each user when clicking the "Send" button.