Recently, both China and the U.S. are ramping up regulation:

The U.S. is cracking down on overseas accounts, China is tightening cross-border brokerages, both are welding shut their own front doors, preventing people and money inside from casually crossing borders. The compliant channels for normal overseas asset allocation are narrowing, and friction is increasing.
But the demand for funds to go abroad for hedging has not disappeared. When the front door is blocked, things like $BTC and $USDT , which can naturally cross borders and are difficult for anyone to easily block, become that invisible window. The more traditional finance is tightly controlled, the more funds find ways to slip through this window.
Both sides are guarding against potential conflicts, reducing dependence on each other. In the past, you could deposit money in the other’s bank or buy their government bonds; if relations soured one day, the other side could freeze your assets with a single keystroke, just like Russia’s overseas assets being frozen.
As a result, now no one trusts anyone among major powers. In this era of mutual suspicion, Bitcoin and gold have become equivalent hard currencies because no one can simply issue an administrative order to wipe them out or freeze them. They have become the only universally recognized, absolutely neutral safe haven between two opposing camps.
However, under a collapsing nest, how can there be a perfect egg? Major powers are all trying to divide, and Bitcoin itself cannot remain completely uninvolved; it is now forced to split into two worlds. The U.S. is desperately “bringing it under control”: turning Bitcoin into a compliant financial toy wrapped in a dollar shell, staying within the U.S. for taxation through spot ETFs and Wall Street compliance. China is desperately “isolating”: building high firewalls, strictly banning domestic trading, preventing it from entering to disrupt the country’s financial and foreign exchange security.
The result is that in the future, Bitcoin may split into two camps: one is the “Wall Street compliant Bitcoin” dressed in suits and sitting in offices; the other is the “native dark flow Bitcoin” growing wildly on the fringes of regulation.
The era of “one global family, capital freely flowing” is over; now it’s “building walls individually, safety first.” As long as major powers continue to guard against each other and tightly regulate traditional finance, Bitcoin’s macro value as a “safety valve” and “decentralized safe deposit box” will always have a fundamental demand.