Central banks and other elites have painted themselves into a corner. There is too much debt in this world, and all of it is based on fiat money that central banks can print.
The elites must maintain trust in this fiat money by keeping inflation low. That means, one way or another, all the growth in wealth must go to a small number of people.
But the more inequality they create, the more distorted and unstable the system becomes. That is, more and more 'fancy' goods and services are produced just to satisfy the whimsical demands by the lucky people. This demand can disappear any time financial asset values go down.
So central banks must keep financial asset values high just to keep this demand going. But this only worsens the inequality, and the cycle continues. Eventually, something will have to trigger a financial asset crash.
The only real solution to this problem, from the elites' point of view, is to inflate away the debt without destroying the trust in state money. And the only way to do that is to devalue state money against non-state money. Traditionally, that non-state money has been gold and silver. Today, the (Western) elites are using Bitcoin and other cryptos to play that role.
You will not hear this perspective from the mainstream media or establishment economists!
First, anyone who says some variant of "the mainstream media won't tell you this, but..." starts out with a deficit of credibility. Add to that "established economists" and it's even worse. Who more likely has a proper understanding of a very complex financial system, those "established economists" with all their years of intensive study, degrees, etc., or some random armchair quarterback on an anonymous internet board?
That said, I find some of the ideas you presented interesting to think about, as they're framed in a way I haven't thought about them before. One idea I've held for a long time is that there is too much debt in the world, but to tie that to necessitating that all new wealth created goes to a small number of people is interesting to think about. I don't at all buy the conclusion at this point. After all, the owners of the debt get richer through future value creation the debt enables, and the natural remedy for too much debt existing is that future value creation doesn't materialize fast enough to pay off the debt. What happens in that case? The owners of the debt lose their investment, and since they're the rich ones anyway and the two premises are mutually exclusive, one has to be wrong. Either there is not too much debt in the world, or the system is not predicated on all future wealth growth going to a small number of people. The average person has immensely more wealth now than they did 50 years ago, as the standard for what is "average" has risen substantially.
Also, no central bank is purposely using crypto assets as a way to inflate the debts away. What you have identified as a deliberate action by central banks is 1) something they have no control over and 2) not causally linked. Bitcoin price has exploded because it's a bubble because people are caught in a manic cycle. If it was central bank-caused, gold would also be exploding in price as a natural hedge against inflation. A central bank can't choose which hedges rise in value and which don't.
The conspiracy theory doesn't check out.
