Author: Jack Inabinet; Source: Bankless; Compiler: BitpushNews
"Trump's brand of American capitalism faces a 'socialist' backlash from conservatives" - BBC
"Republican senators sound alarm bells over Donald Trump's 'socialist step'" - Newsweek
"Investors worry Trump's Intel deal ushers in an era of US industrial policy" - Reuters
These recent headlines seem to capture the unease among business leaders who watched in shock as the US federal government acquired a 10% stake in Intel.
While the move has divided opinion within the party, drawing rare criticism from hardcore conservatives and applause from those more socialist-leaning, one thing is clear: the script of America's laissez-faire capitalism is being rewritten in real time.
President Trump has already clashed with free-market conservatives at least twice during his second term. In June, his administration approved Japan’s Nippon Steel’s acquisition of U.S. Steel, but only after Washington received a “golden share” that would have given it broad governance rights over the U.S. subsidiary.
Intra-party criticism may be a rare phenomenon in American politics, but Trump has shrugged off this round of conservative condemnation, declaring to followers on Truth Social on Monday that he would do similar deals “all day long.”
In an op-ed for The Hill, an anonymous Republican strategist defended Trump’s takeover of companies like U.S. Steel and Intel, arguing that the moves were justified because their output is “critical to America’s defense needs and national security.”

When I think about cryptocurrencies…
While the current cryptocurrency holdings by the U.S. government primarily come from criminal assets seized by law enforcement, if the Intel case is any indication, such acquisitions are far from certain.
Since the beginning of his campaign, Donald Trump has promised to make clarity on cryptocurrency a policy priority. Early achievements of the Trump administration include:
Enacting the GENIUS Act legislation, paving the way for mainstream stablecoin adoption
Establishing a strategic cryptocurrency reserve to safeguard government holdings of digital assets
Revitalizing the SEC through a dedicated cryptocurrency task force and “The Crypto Project”
Dismissing major pending regulatory actions against cryptocurrency companies
Trump administration insiders have long insisted on using a “budget-neutral” approach to expand federal crypto asset holdings, and the acquisition of Intel appears to establish a precedent for such purchases.
As the only cutting-edge chipmaker in the United States, Intel plays a key role in securing America’s digital future. Viewed this way, the federal government likely hopes to protect the nation's best interests by holding a stake in Intel, perhaps by guiding production priorities or prohibiting bad practices (like divesting money-losing chip foundries). The Intel acquisition was "funded" by appropriations from the Biden-era CHIPS Act. While the funds allocated by the program undoubtedly cost taxpayers money, they were originally intended for semiconductor research and development, meaning the government's Intel stake was technically "free." Currency modernization has long been imperative. Just as computer chips have played a crucial role in contemporary society, blockchain-based payments are poised to play a significant role in the next generation of financial systems. The passage of the Genius Act underscores this bipartisan acceptance, and while progress in Washington, D.C. is notoriously slow, future legislation could authorize spending on grants aimed at strengthening blockchain payment systems. Such a critical payment network would naturally be classified as vital to U.S. national security, and given the precedent set by the Intel deal, these grants could be considered consideration for an interest in the network's token. Therefore, the only real question now is which crypto asset Washington will choose to embrace. Will the United States consolidate its position as the world's largest national Bitcoin holder, or will it choose another network as the backbone of its digital economy?
Whatever the outcome, the precedent has been set: The U.S. government is no longer just a regulator of high tech; it is becoming an active market participant.