I'm not sure why you're being downvoted here, this is all good sense - if "Layer 2" casino chips are actually more useful to me, and interoperate seemlessly with "layer 1", there seems no particular reason to care about the power struggle the author frames, or even paint it in terms of a struggle.
AFAICT there is no war between the Bank of England and the banks in the UK over who gets to issue the money, no conflict, just the system running as it is designed with various participants in their niche.
The author likes to paint proponents of cashless societies as naive, but to me it looks like they have decided there's a moral component and a battle where it seems really there is none, or at least it is a political/idealogical viewpoint they are superimposing on the situation.
IMHO, if you value financial privacy as an important civic right, the total abandonment of layer 1 cash (which has it) for layer 2 chips (which notoriously lacks it), really is a political and moral issue.
AFAICT there is no war between the Bank of England and the banks in the UK over who gets to issue the money, no conflict, just the system running as it is designed with various participants in their niche.
The author likes to paint proponents of cashless societies as naive, but to me it looks like they have decided there's a moral component and a battle where it seems really there is none, or at least it is a political/idealogical viewpoint they are superimposing on the situation.