They can do that if there are things related to national treasuries which have risk for IMF but if a nation as no loan with IMF, this foundation has no rights and no reasons to complain.

El Salvador made Bitcoin legal tender in their country but some years later, under request and pressure from IMF, that government had to stop "Bitcoin legal tender" in their nation.

What’s the status of Bitcoin in El Salvador after its IMF deal?

Bitcoin and fiat currency can exist within the framework of the concept of the unity and struggle of opposites (classical dialectic).🙋

Governments will restrict Bitcoin's use by all means possible. Governments wield legislation and a powerful repressive apparatus. People will try to use Bitcoin because they are dissatisfied with how officials control their destinies. It's hard to live in countries with hyperinflation. It's hard to live when a commercial bank can block your transactions at any moment...

In their fight against Bitcoin, governments will introduce central bank digital currencies, KYC, and AML procedures. People, in response, will use Bitcoin in conjunction with Monero. This is dialectic! Dialectic is the basis of all development and evolution.💁

There is no more obstacle in adopting Bitcoin in the world, the countries that have adopted Bitcoin are currently the best and are able to implement the plans. The countries that have not adopted Bitcoin are secretly using Bitcoin but there is no pressure from the government, so at this time,
Bitcoin should be conveyed to more people because those who are yet to adopt Bitcoin should adopt Bitcoin quickly. However, we can spread Bitcoin more through each other's discussions and we can attract more people to invest by seeing the benefits of Bitcoin. So those who have not yet been able to invest in Bitcoin should invest in Bitcoin quickly.

The actions people take with Bitcoin can already be considered real actions. People’s adoption of Bitcoin is a real action.
To put it simply, it’s like communicating with someone over long distances by phone. Especially now that video calls are possible.
One thing I believe cannot be forced is compelling Bitcoin users to use Bitcoin as a payment method, because not everyone can do so—even if they really want to—due to national regulations.

In as much as I would love to see bitcoin being used as day to day symbol of transactions, there are challenges which it could face and can be a hinderance in the quest to become a mainstream real-world day to day symbol of transaction because  there are many holders who wouldn’t want to spend their bitcoins on daily basis to make purchases because of the possible potential value in the future. They plan to HODL to provide them with a store of value rather than using it as a spendable currency. Congestions due to high network traffic can lead to a delay in transaction and confirmation at a certain retail services leading to some serious trust issues among individuals and customers.

Volatility will be engaged with Bitcoin because it's  part of its nature till things are settled about stability, which have surely never been easily predictable when it's going to have any level where this could be done, so it's never been an issue. It's all about the fact that currently many merchants are using this through third parties, which are making things difficult, and they are not able to settle payments, which need quick responses.Now spending and using is an easy path for millions, but having this on level is a problem. Now keeping this as an asset or saving is giving enough encouragement because people are able to fight with inflation easily through its price movement. Short term use is risky, and I never have enough encouragement, but still it's having a good way for people to understand and can make it all easy.

Bitcoin adoption actually grows very slowly because no group or company advertises it. Normally a banking company will advertise so much that everyone uses their app for making payments but since Bitcoin is not that profitable in this way no company or individual will advertises it either.

If an economic crisis starts in any country and everyone loses trust in banks or fiat only then will people shift to Bitcoin and it will spread very quickly throughout the world.

I do understand your point here, but the reality is just different and we cannot deny the fact as well that stablecoins or fiat digital currency is just way better when it comes to day-to-day transactions. Just the volatile market price is already an inconvenience for the user so it just wasn't suitable for this kind of things yet, stablecoins might be better to this kind of things since it hold value quite well than Bitcoin, similar to fiat money.

I mean for me, Bitcoin is already better this way since that is what Bitcoin is, it might not be meant or created to be like that but it just became like that because of it's structure; the supply and demand etc., make it what it is today. It could be better for sure, and I would prefer it if I could use it as well, but if it has a stable market price, then it's not going to be good as an investment anymore. We can't just have it all in Bitcoin, but there are other cryptocurrencies like stablecoins, etc.

At its core, the only requirement for a payment to take place is that the counterparty agrees to accept it. The specific method of payment is simply a matter of agreement between the parties involved; which is why some transactions are conducted using tangible assets, works of art, precious metals, or even "Pokémon" cards.

Regarding "real" adoption: while one might have argued a few years ago that adoption should follow the path you describe, that is no longer relevant in 2026. In an era where a single corporation could potentially buy millions of Bitcoins, the distinction becomes priority. Whether a million individual users choose to purchase everyday items with Bitcoin is certainly a social (perhaps even revolutionary) phenomenon, but it has little bearing on the current reality, where the primary metric is the total market volume that Bitcoin commands.

I believe the current discourse surrounding mass adoption (the idea that Bitcoin must become a means of everyday payment) aligns well with the sentiment immortalized by Satoshi Nakamoto: "If you don't understand me, I don't have time to explain it to you..."

In other words, how much longer are we going to keep waiting for this "mass adoption"—meaning the use of cryptocurrencies for everyday payments, like buying a cup of coffee? It's already happening. If someone doesn't see it that way, let them go ahead and buy their coffee with Bitcoin; but we can't keep waiting for people who simply fail to catch on.

imo by fM

It has always been the government because they don't want something to exist without their full custody. That's how greedy and selfish they are.

However, the good thing is, bitcoin's global adoption is already in progress. Despite the fact that majority are still seeing bitcoin as a good store of value, at least some of them are also using bitcoin for borderless transactions, and pay bitcoin online as long as the merchants are willing to accept it as a payment mode. That's already a good achievement for bitcoin, not to make bitcoin as a legal tender, but as an alternative to fiat sytem.