Facebook has revealed its intention to introduce a novel digital currency, designated as Libra, thereby expanding its ambition to achieve global dominance in both communication and commerce.

Endorsed by prominent financial and technology entities such as Visa, Spotify, eBay, PayPal, and Uber, and boasting an immediate global user base exceeding two billion individuals, the platform is strategically positioned to compel nations and their central banks into collaboration with its vision for a reimagined international financial architecture.

From my perspective as a specialist in social media research and education, it is evident that Facebook’s Chief Executive Officer, Mark Zuckerberg, is pursuing an agenda to significantly amplify his company’s global political influence, notwithstanding the potential peril to society at large.

In essence, he is signaling a desire for Facebook to evolve into a virtual nation, populated by its users, sustained by its own economic ecosystem, and governed by a CEO—Mr. Zuckerberg himself—who is not even answerable to its shareholders.

Facebook’s track record demonstrates a pattern of behaving irresponsibly, and it continues to grapple with substantial public apprehension and official inquiries concerning its data privacy protocols, the veracity of information disseminated, and its approach to targeted advertising.

Consequently, it is imperative to critically assess the promotional fanfare. Individuals must discern who is engineering global transformations, and whether these endeavors align with the collective good of humanity—or if they are merely designed to benefit a new echelon of preeminent technology executives.

Humanity requires ethical governance, coupled with contemplative deliberation on the ramifications of swift technological advancements. This is precisely why, in my judgment, Facebook’s proposed cryptocurrency should be halted by financial regulatory bodies until its architecture is demonstrably secure for the entirety of global society.

Comprehending Libra

Technology conglomerates are exhibiting a keen interest in establishing a global digital currency native to the internet. Such a development could empower platforms like Facebook and Twitter to expand their user engagement and subsequently monetize transactions from businesses seeking to integrate with the new ecosystem.

Furthermore, their objective is to divert considerable business away from the established financial services sector. This industry, valued in the trillions of dollars and exceptionally lucrative, has nonetheless encountered challenges in implementing its own digital payment solutions.

While the precise technical specifications of Facebook’s strategy are still unfolding, it appears the company is not aiming to directly compete with Bitcoin or other digital currencies. Instead, Facebook is endeavoring to supplant the existing global financial infrastructure with a completely novel framework, with Libra positioned at its core.

The company may be leveraging growing public interest in digital currencies and financial technologies, along with its substantial market leverage, to surmount potential objections. However, I maintain that Facebook should not be permitted to disrupt the global financial system in the same manner that many believe it has already compromised global communications.

Accelerating Global Transactions

There is an undeniable requirement for more efficient, expedited, and cost-effective methods to facilitate international money transfers, and to extend financial services accessibility to the vast number of individuals lacking formal banking relationships.

Libra holds considerable promising potential, yet there remain avenues for further enhancement, specifically in developing a payment mechanism that more comprehensively serves the global populace.

As currently conceptualized, Libra is intended to function as a form of digital currency pegged to multiple national currencies. This has sparked apprehensions that Libra could eventually attain the status of a sovereign currency, with Facebook operating as a “shadow bank” capable of challenging national central banks.

Adding to these concerns, Facebook is proactively attempting to circumvent regulatory oversight by establishing a corporate subsidiary that will participate in a reportedly independent oversight body for Libra.

To safeguard consumers, regulatory authorities must conduct a thorough due diligence examination of the integrity of the proposed Libra support system.

It is conceivable that an entirely new framework of financial statutes and regulations will be necessary to insulate the existing financial system from adverse effects should Libra gain greater traction than national currencies.

At a minimum, governmental bodies must adopt a cautious and deliberate approach when novel products present potential systemic risks to our economic landscape. This sentiment has even been echoed by the Chief Executive Officer of Google. In my estimation, Libra’s scheduled introduction in 2020 does not afford adequate time for a comprehensive appraisal of this technology and its associated risks.

Safeguarding the Global Financial Order

Financial regulations have evolved over time to foster interoperability and trust among disparate parties, and to shield ordinary consumers from fraudulent activities and corporate avarice. Regulations also assist governments in detecting and preventing transactions that facilitate criminal enterprises and terrorism.

This is not to suggest that all financial exchanges and consumptions must be inextricably linked to a verifiable identity, whether online or offline. Indeed, the use of physical currency and the right to anonymity are fundamental civil liberties essential for privacy and personal autonomy.

As novel digital financial services, electronic payment methodologies, and currencies emerge and gain widespread adoption, they must not be permitted to erode established financial safeguarding mechanisms, even under the guise of facilitating more seamless and economical transactions.

My apprehension extends beyond the implications of high-volume transactions. Facebook has previously demonstrated how even modest sums of money can be instrumental in funding microtargeted advertising campaigns with the capacity to sway public opinion and influence electoral outcomes both domestically and internationally.

Product Development and Risk Evaluation

Facebook possesses a protracted history characterized by questionable operational strategies and data privacy protocols. The public, their governmental representatives—including legislators, financial regulators, and central banking authorities—should undertake a rigorous examination of all facets of Facebook’s digital currency initiatives.

This concern is particularly acute given Facebook’s established pattern of introducing products and services, such as political advertisements and real-time video broadcasts, without adequately anticipating their potential detrimental impact on democratic processes and broader societal welfare.

The company has evinced an inability to contribute positively to society—and may indeed lack the inclination to do so.

All indicators suggest that both consumers and regulators should meticulously assess whether Facebook’s Libra represents genuine innovation or merely a stratagem to circumvent existing constraints on a potentially hazardous financial instrument.

Upholding Democratic Integrity

Facebook’s foray into the financial industry constitutes a significant threat to democratic governance and its constituents worldwide, comparable in scale to the challenges posed by misinformation and information warfare, which also derive considerable efficacy from social media platforms.

It may prove difficult for global leaders to recognize the urgency of this situation, as they may not fully perceive the emergent virtual forces arrayed against them. Nevertheless, they must convene with haste to ensure they possess—and maintain—the capacity to shield their populations from the acquisitive ambitions of technology enterprises.

A critical factor will be determining whether Facebook’s prospective digital currency ultimately functions akin to untraceable cash or more like a auditable credit card transaction. Facebook possesses the requisite blockchain and encryption technologies to develop either an anonymous digital cash equivalent or a proprietary digital currency, a capability that has not yet been realized.

The presence of anonymity would amplify the risks of illicit activities such as money laundering, thus warranting vigilance for any cash-like Facebook cryptocurrency that mirrors the central banking system’s approach to physical currency.

Moreover, the chosen name, Libra, which evokes the Roman unit of weight historically used for coinage, merits reflection.

In many respects, the enterprise being cultivated by Mark Zuckerberg is increasingly resembling a Roman Empire, now complete with its own central bank and currency, rather than a conventional corporation.

The fundamental issue is that this nascent, nation-like platform operates as a centrally controlled entity, managed more like a dictatorship than a sovereign state with democratically elected leadership. Even now, the company may wield influence comparable to that of certain nations—and exceed that of others.

In the aftermath of the not-too-distant global financial crisis, and amid the burgeoning culture of “fake news” and disinformation, it is imperative for society to pause and thoroughly evaluate disruptive technologies of this magnitude.

The societal infrastructure cannot withstand a launch executed in Facebook’s infamous “move fast and break things” paradigm. The Conversation