I doubt anyone here is entertaining that notion, but it's the kind of thing the bureaucrats obsess over.  I suppose they are accountable if they do get it wrong, but yes, it's a pretty far-fetched scenario.  

Our goal presumably involves trying to highlight to the uninitiated masses what the consequences might be for them if they do adopt CBDCs.  The absolute death-knell of privacy being chief amongst them, but censorship a serious concern as well (and, unlike this current situation with a small percentage of pools censoring OFAC listed addresses, it's likely to be a more pervasive, inescapable and unyielding type of censorship with CBDCs, with little room for recourse).  Even if we can't necessarily persuade people about the advantages of using Bitcoin, it could be an "anything but CBDCs" kind of discussion.  

The masses have a distinct knack for acting against their own self-interests when given the opportunity, so it won't be as easy as it might sound to convince them that CBDCs are very bad for them.  You'd be surprised at how quickly some might embrace this mass-surveillance foolishness.

You should study how bitcoin works , and Antonopoulos isn't the best source .