> So most of the people using it are either bad actors or speculators

"bad actors" according to their government, which could mean people who simply want the right to vote, or to live free from oppression, secret police, etc.

Even if we take this at face value and assume these are all dissidents seeking freedom, cryptocurrencies would be a bad idea because they force you to leave a paper trail for prosecutors and deal with intermediaries who could be suborned. If Iranian dissidents buy something with cash, they might find that the person they thought was trustworthy is secretly working for the police and they’re going to have a bad time but they would at least only have proof of that single transaction. If they use cryptocurrency, the police get likely years worth of transaction history and a list of everyone you’ve worked with.

Indeed, what about all of the decent and moral people using digital currency for such reasons?

Across all of them? A very low percentage. Fraud and speculation is left, right, and center.

Unfortunately, only a few, like Bitcoin, can justify their existence on moral grounds. Hopefully the concept doesn’t get banned completely.

>So most of the people using it are either bad actors or speculators

It's a matter of perspective. For many people around the world, the US government is the bad actor, the bad actor preventing them transferring funds through "normal" (US controlled) routes.

Yup. The only reason blockchain has any legitimate use at all is because governments are bad actors.

Doesn't change that many of the people using the system are also bad actors of one form or another.