That's not the point: the point is "how do you buy the coin in the first place?"

If you live in a place then you have to trade in whatever the local currency is. You didn't "opt in" to a particular stable coin: someone has to be willing to accept that specific coin as payment.

And they can't just exchange it to another: the exchange has to want to sell that coin in exchange for the coin you transact with.

And to interact locally with the government, you need someone who is willing to sell coins in exchange for the currency you don't want.

In practical alternate market economies, the only currency which trades tends to be USD and the exchange rate will be bad because it's a grey market. I would go further and posit that where crypto has any impact, it's people because it's a window into being able to hold USD.

Certainly the only question anyone asks about Tether is whether they actually have the USD to cover their position: no one wants a Yuan based see stable coin.

I think it's pretty easy to buy the coins, regardless of government intervention. Countries (ie China, Nigeria) have tried and failed to restrict access to cryptocurrencies. Whether you get good execution is a separate issue- my point is that stablecoins enable you to execute these trades in the first place.

Agree with the posit- stablecoins grew a lot during periods of strict monetary policy (ie capital outflow from China starting in 2015, hyperinflation in 2023).

Note my original post said disruptive, not good. Meant it in the truest sense of the word; both good and bad comes out of it.