Yes, that is certainly a tension here. I think it's easier to think of the paper as two broadly different subparts. The first part is: "regardless of what you

Yes, that is certainly a tension here. I think it's easier to think of the paper as two broadly different subparts. The first part is: "regardless of what you think, if something you do rearranges power, then it will become political". This is more a statement of fact than anything else. The second part is: "now that I hope to have convinced you that crypto is necessarily political, here's the moral stance I would prefer for you to follow."