[m-i-l]

> If Libra is an oligarchy, closed financial systems are dictatorships

Given the global financial system is not controlled by one individual, it isn't a Dictatorship (power of one) but is more like a form of Oligarchy (power of the few). As for which form of Oligarchy each are, I'd argue that the existing financial system is more of a Technocracy (i.e. you need to know what you are doing to be one of the few) whereas Libra is a Plutocracy (you need to be wealthy to be one of the few) or even possibly a Kleptocracy depending on how they actually run it and what their true motives are.

[acesubido]

> whereas Libra is a Plutocracy (you need to be wealthy to be one of the few)

Agreed. The same way governments require a large amount of capital to be a bank to ensure depositors of liquidity. You need to have capital to back the Libra tokens, otherwise it can get pretty scary, just like USD Tether shenanigans.

> or even possibly a Kleptocracy depending on how they actually run it and what their true motives are.

Banks, Central Banks, Governments, etc. whatever. Their motives are exactly "secret" when it comes to managing currencies. They all gear towards enriching their currency and making it more valuable. So yeah for this "oligarchy", I'd bet it's the same, Kleptocracy it is.

[m-i-l]

I think this may be conflating individuals with corporate entities. Certainly from a corporate entity perspective both have significant capital requirements. But from an individual perspective, to be an influential figure at a central bank you will have had to have undergone years of relevant training, passed regulatory exams, and typically have proved yourself in a related position over a long period of time, hence considering it more of Technocracy. However, to be an influential figure in something like Libra, you just need a shed load of cash, and can have precisely zero understanding of modern finance, hence my seeing it more of a Plutocracy, or even Kleptocracy. Broadening this out beyond Libra, if you want to be a leading figure in one of the more cult-like cryptocurrencies, you also need a lot of blind faith and be good at rousing your followers, so there is an element of Theocracy in there too. I know in the early days anyone with a bit of technical knowledge could set one up without having access to large amounts of capital, and there was talk of this "democratising money", but those days are long gone.

The main central banks usually have a monetary policy clearly defined by their governments. Typically this will include things like "target of keeping inflation at 2%"[0]. This is not exactly secret. It can however be very difficult for people without the necessary backgrounds to fully understand. But I guess we are living in an era of short attention spans and distrust of experts, which provides a fertile breeding ground for cryptocurrency conspiracy theorists to exploit for personal profit.

[0] https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy