This is not a technical challenge I’m making. This is a political demand.
You would also still have to prove it’s more efficient and has a smaller carbon and energy footprint than traditional currency.
I agree with you that cryptocurrency is not currently particularly intrinsically useful, but I don't believe that "let everyone use it in a decentralized tamper-proof manner" fundamentally requires "and simultaneously restrict it from the following uses, which a subset of the global population deems undesirable".
(In that regard, it's similar to "regular" crypto. I don't mind that people I don't particularly like are also able to use crypto to secure their communications. It's essential to my use case that they not be able to intercept my comms, and I accept in return that I can't intercept their comms either.)
I didn't really think about distributed cryptographic "proof" and the chaining so you can't delete B from A - B - C and chain up A - C, indeed the authority would just have to be trusted and be somehow tamper proof.
Blockchain would be interesting to record the sequence of events you want to make sure people can't change retroactively, making it distributed means it's ecologically disastrous though.
Yes, there's also the proof-of-work part. We had that in 1999 with Hashcash.
The only thing bitcoin brought to the table was moving proof-of-work from a trusted hardware module to a P2P network.