I think this take is either a bit disingenuous or possibly just misinformed. There are very few people who don't want 'government money' because it comes from government and government bad.
People want money that isn't associated with government because they believe, among other reasons, that having access to the levers and dials that fiat currency provides corrupts the government (as a system), the government (as in the people who govern), and the markets that they govern over. Time and time again governments have shown that they lack the ability to responsibly operate those levers and dials so a growing number of people are suggesting that maybe that shouldn't be something we put into a small cadre of human hands.
This is a little bit like if we had a government-regulated medical system and the government decided to make heart medicine very expensive because the rate of population growth was too high and we needed to slow down the biological market, only to panic 5 years later and make birth control cost 500 times as much and all other medicines free when the population growth got too low and then repeat that cycle forever, all the while turning a blind eye to a parasite class that profited from these cycles.
There is no intrinsic reason why the financial system could not be organized and, where required, regulated with the same (in)competency or transparency or checks-and-balances as any other domain of equal importance. To accept this can't be done is to imply that the particular parasite class benefiting from the status-quo is more of a parasite than others. This doesn't feel to be the case. In the scheme of things there are worse leeches, some in plain sight.
The naivete and total inadequacy of cryptocurrency as an alternative financial system is exploding right as we speak. While it had (maybe) some limited use signalling to the status-quo that "they should behave - or else" - see e.g. CBDC, the exploitation and betrayal of countless individuals with fake promises will ultimately only further entrench the notion that there is no alternative to the parasites. That is sad.
It all loops back to building trust networks and enticing individuals to participate because they will be better of and not screwed by insiders. This cannot be enforced magically by numerical algorithms and blockchains. It is a contract by and for humans.
You further suggest that cryptocurrency is somehow 'exploding' - crypto dollar prices routinely 'explode' up or down because it's very, very small and it's new enough that gullible people are quick to dump buckets of money into the ocean of scams that exist and they inevitably evaporate, taking that money with them.
That's not a feature of 'crypto' and it doesnt mean that crypto is dead - I wish I had a little bit of ETH for every time crypto was 'dead' - cryptocurrency is fundamentally just the idea of a a decentralized bookkeeping algorithm, with different details on how you keep that book. A lot of people suggest to gullible investors that the best way to keep that book is to trust a small group of people to keep the book for you, which is of course a recipe for disaster and is no better than just having a MS excel spreadsheet on my computer. The results are predictably 'explodey'.
The serious crypto projects, meanwhile, just continue development. There are enormous communities of people who sincerely believe in the promise of a future with permissionless programmable money. These people were working a decade ago, a year ago, a week ago, they'll be working tomorrow.
Another post suggests that everyone interested in crypto is interested to make money. I can't help that they've only been exposed to people looking to make a quick buck but I think it's safe to say in most human activities many of the people involved will be trying to find a personal benefit in as short a timescale as possible. In the same way, in most human activities there will be a core group of people trying to change the world around them for the better. Crypto is no different.
My main point (restated in the ethics context) is that there is no reason why ethical standards should be lower in finance. In a sane society that is not ripping itself apart in theft and exploitation all critical systems (and finance certainly qualifies) must benefit from a similar level of good governance. We de-facto trust each other on countless important matters and our focus and efforts should be on the cases where this trust is betrayed. A technology that is built on the premise of a trust-less society is at best a monumental waste of human talent and at worst deceitful and malevolent.
Every single crypto enthusiast I know, builder or speculator, has converted crypto to fiat riches, and dreams of wealth. I have yet to meet someone who lives frugally and keeps their wealth in volatile crypto coins.
breach of trust is indeed a major problem and it erodes the social contract and technology could obviously play a positive role. not by creating inflated hypes that are only good for management consulting fees though...