Given the nature of finance and of digital payments, the state cannot trust a system which is not 100% under their control. So there's only one short occasion when they will give in to this principle - when they have no other choice. Or when not doing the alternative is a worse choice. And when thats happening there will be bigger things to worry about than that the state is spying on you.
There's just such a short opportunity approaching toward the end of 2026 perhaps early 2027, with the onset of the next great recession - a global system wide recession root caused by speculation in real estate(mortgages mostly), triggered by who knows what this time. It's going to happen. And is just a matter of when. Usually a system can only hold out until the value of real estate exceeds the ability of the nation to pay for it. This is usually just under 20 years under current conditions.
This activity of the state spying on and attacking its own people, applies to even your granny's basic web browser use, where the cryptographic infrastructure securing her web browsing has always had a back door for the state to take a peek if it needs to. Thats hardly a problem for the billions of normal punters like granny, who are totally unimportant to the state in this respect. It just gives access for the state to attack the few bad players when it needs to for your protection(and the children of course!). Sure, the state might be bad too and start to attack its own people and defend foreign invaders as we're seeing today in the UK. Migrant Hotel Rights Trump Local Rights Says Government in Bid to Overturn Epping Injunction.
Why is the coming great recession an irresistible opportunity for the state to adopt a CBDC? If global finance is under water, how will the people use money to make exchanges for goods and services? Well there's technology which can deliver the remedy already running on chain at the scale needed for a million transactions per second in a nation the size of the UK.
Until now leadership of all nations have refused to adopt CBDC's largely because they do not need them but also because they do not trust the technology. Citizens' exchanges on chain are peer to peer after all, that is, between your phone and mine. There's no trusted third party - a bank, as a man in the middle checking your payment as it goes to your coffee shop. The system cannot be trusted unless transactions can be traced and followed.
Yes, your transaction eventually gets sent to the network to be recorded on the blockchain in perpetuity and immutably. But is this such a great problem when the technology also already accounts for those risks to your privacy. See here for why its not a problem: Spending in the Crowd — Hiding Received Notes by Time, Split, and Change
So in the end, theres no need to fear the adoption of a CBDC. The state won't adopt it unless you're in more jeopardy if they don't do it. And anyway, the technology protects your privacy anyway, far more than a bank can today.