In an industry where decentralization is often claimed but rarely understood, the question of who truly controls a blockchain remains one of crypto’s most contested debates. As regulators, institutions, and developers scrutinize public ledgers more closely, clarity around governance and control has become central to determining long-term credibility. Few networks have faced this scrutiny as persistently as the XRP Ledger.
That debate resurfaced following a recent X post shared by XRP_Cro, which featured a video clip of Ripple Chief Technology Officer David Schwartz addressing the nature of decentralization on the XRP Ledger. The post drew renewed attention to a topic that has followed XRP for over a decade: whether any entity, including Ripple itself, has control over the network.
David Schwartz Explains XRPL’s Governance Structure
In the video, Schwartz offers a direct and unambiguous explanation of what decentralization means in the context of the XRP Ledger. According to the Ripple CTO, decentralization is not defined by branding or influence, but by legal authority and technical enforcement.
“The XRP Ledger is decentralized because no organization or individual has any legal right or ability to control it,” Schwartz stated.
David Schwartz, CTO @Ripple:
The #XRP Ledger is decentralized.
No one has legal control over it. pic.twitter.com/hycYdfWt7Q— XRP_Cro 🔥 AI / Gaming / DePIN (@stedas) December 15, 2025
He further explained that governance on the XRP Ledger is distributed across its participants, not dictated by a central operator. “Every participant enforces every single rule, and the system is governed by all of its participants,” he said, emphasizing that rule enforcement is collective rather than hierarchical.
How Consensus Works on the XRP Ledger
The XRP Ledger operates using a consensus mechanism distinct from proof-of-work or proof-of-stake systems. Validators independently verify transactions and agree on ledger states through consensus rounds. No single validator, company, or group can unilaterally alter transaction history or protocol rules.
While Ripple operates some validators and contributes to XRPL development, it does not possess special privileges within the network. Any proposed protocol change must be adopted voluntarily by a supermajority of validators. Without that broad agreement, changes simply do not activate.
This structure directly supports Schwartz’s assertion that control is neither centralized nor enforceable by legal or corporate means.
We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1
— TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025
Legal Control Versus Network Participation
A critical distinction highlighted in Schwartz’s remarks is the difference between influence and control. Ripple can propose improvements, publish software, and advocate for certain developments, but it cannot compel participants to accept them. Validators are free to choose which software version they run and which amendments they support.
This distinction became especially important during regulatory discussions surrounding XRP. Courts ultimately recognized that the XRP Ledger operates independently of Ripple, reinforcing the idea that ownership of a token or contribution to development does not equate to control of a decentralized network.
Why the Statement Matters Now
As institutional adoption accelerates and regulatory clarity improves, understanding decentralization is no longer academic. For XRP, Schwartz’s explanation reinforces a foundational principle: the ledger’s rules are enforced by its users, not dictated by a company.
The XRP_Cro post brings renewed visibility to this reality, grounding the decentralization debate not in speculation, but in how the XRP Ledger actually functions today.
Disclaimer: This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are urged to do in-depth research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses.
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Telegram, and Google News
