Group 1 - The core argument is that the dollar is facing a "anchor" crisis due to the diminishing effectiveness of its traditional backing, such as gold reserves and industrial production capacity, leading to a potential structural adjustment in the international monetary system [1][4][12] - The transition from the gold standard to the gold-exchange standard established a long-lasting credit system for the dollar, which was initially supported by abundant gold reserves [5][7] - The Bretton Woods system expanded the gold-exchange standard globally, with the dollar being pegged to gold, but this system eventually collapsed due to the Triffin dilemma, highlighting the limitations of gold as a backing for the dollar [8][10] Group 2 - The "petrodollar" system was established to create a new anchor for the dollar, linking it to oil trade, which significantly increased the demand for dollars in international transactions [11][12] - The current geopolitical landscape and the rise of alternative currencies, such as the euro and yuan, are challenging the dominance of the dollar, as countries seek to reduce reliance on it for trade [12][14] - The U.S. is attempting to find new anchors for the dollar, such as high-tech products and critical minerals, but faces significant challenges in establishing these as viable alternatives to the "petrodollar" [15][16] Group 3 - The emergence of stablecoins as a potential means to maintain dollar dominance raises questions about their stability and the underlying assets they are tied to, which may not provide a reliable foundation for the dollar's future [18][19] - The volatility of the underlying dollar assets poses risks to stablecoins, as seen during the Silicon Valley Bank crisis, which affected the value of stablecoins like USDC [18][19]