> Another argument is that crypto enables ransomware attacks. This to me sounds akin to saying “encryption enables child exploitation”. I.e. it focuses on one abhorrent element of society that would take place no matter what and blames its existence on a system which has great potential for good, a kind of propagandist thinking.

You are biased too. How about comparing "crypto enables ransomware" to "unregulated gun sales enable mass shootings" ? Most western countries have regulated gun sales to avoid mass shootings, it works and the people sees this as a positive thing.

OK, it's controversial so replace "gun" with something else that is forbidden in the US for the greater good.

Compared to "guns for everyone", encryption has a lot of usages that are necessary (and beneficial). That's why banning encryption on the pretense of child exploitation is a mistake.

What does crypto bring to the table that is as necessary and beneficial as encryption ? Is it more like encryption or more like guns ?

On the other hand you also have to compare the bad side : is enabling ransomware as bad as enabling child exploitation or mass shootings ? (certainly not).