XRP’s decentralization debated as Ripple leadership visibility contrasts with technical independence - IcoHolder.

The crypto community is once again debating the decentralization of XRP, sparked by a surprising tweet from MMA star Conor McGregor suggesting the U.S. government might invest in XRP, along with SOL and ADA. The comment has reignited long-standing questions: Is XRP truly decentralized like Bitcoin, or does Ripple maintain control?

Central to the skepticism is Ripple’s high-profile leadership. Bitcoin’s anonymity under Satoshi Nakamoto stands in contrast to Ripple’s well-known CEO, Brad Garlinghouse, and CTO David Schwartz. Critics argue that such visibility suggests centralized control. However, Schwartz has stepped in to clarify that this perception doesn’t match XRP’s technical reality.

Schwartz emphasized that XRP has no issuer and no mechanism to create more tokens. Unlike Bitcoin, which is mined over time, XRP’s entire supply was generated when the XRP Ledger (XRPL) launched. This design removes the need for mining or future token distribution, which Schwartz argues makes XRP less susceptible to manipulation by any single entity—including Ripple itself.

“The XRP Ledger has no mechanism for creating new XRP,” he stated, asserting that Ripple cannot control or inflate the supply.

Rather than fixating on whether XRP is "centralized" in name, Schwartz urged the community to focus on the core goals of decentralization: censorship resistance, independence from single-party control, and system integrity. He argued that XRP’s architecture achieves these goals in a distinct but effective way, challenging the narrative that visibility of leadership equals centralized control.

One major source of confusion is the conflation of Ripple’s corporate presence with XRP’s governance. While Ripple continues to advocate for the asset and promote enterprise adoption, Schwartz clarified that the XRP Ledger functions independently of the company. Visibility in regulatory circles, he added, should not be mistaken for operational control.

The debate comes at a critical time for XRP, with speculation about a potential ETF and increased institutional interest. Some analysts believe such developments could push XRP’s price as high as $8, but concerns about decentralization remain a sticking point for traditional investors.

Ultimately, Schwartz’s defense reframes the decentralization debate. XRP may not mirror Bitcoin’s anonymous origin, but its design, according to him, protects users against central authority and censorship just as effectively. As public figures like McGregor bring fresh attention to XRP, the crypto world is being challenged to rethink what decentralization truly means—and whether XRP fits the definition.