If a for-profit company is running the currency, the users of the currency are in a loosing position
True, but exactly the same applies to a state running the currency, with even more evidence of malfeasance and manipulation. State currency loses significant value every year by design, and the management of it is really opaque.
I’d rather a cooperative mutually owned currency to either corporate or state control.
If you're imagining a mutual organisation of millions of people who are theoretically on equal standing and have a say in governance as far as possible, wouldn't that look rather like a state? What's the practical distinction you're drawing between a cooperative mutual organisation and a state?
In general I guess you don't exactly get to choose willy-nilly which state you want to belong to, but you can make a choice to trying to get out of your current one, at least usually.
No you don’t, and that would be the difference. Our system is still remarkably feudal - obligations are assigned at birth and citizenship is an obligation, not a choice.
Of course if you’re rich or privileged there are many options.
True, but exactly the same applies to a state running the currency, with even more evidence of malfeasance and manipulation. State currency loses significant value every year by design, and the management of it is really opaque.
I’d rather a cooperative mutually owned currency to either corporate or state control.