Bitcoin is Losing the Midas Touch

Bitcoin, the decentralised, mainly digital currency that is neither issued nor guaranteed by central banks, has always seemed like a magic trick. Rather than spinning straw into gold it transforms wasted computing power into money that people will actually accept as payment.

Radical libertarians have desperately wanted to believe in it because they hope it can resolve the following dilemma. They prefer markets to politics and they violently distrust states. But modern states in effect have a monopoly over the currencies that markets need in order to work.

Bitcoin, if it became broadly accepted, would challenge states’ dominance of the economy. It is designed to prevent monopoly by states or other entities, building a new currency based on shared information and making it hard for any entity to gain control. Politics disappears and a combination of technology and cryptographic proofs is conjured up in its place.

Unfortunately, the magic is wearing off. Some of the technological innovations associated with bitcoin will stick around. The political project will not. Rather than overcoming conventional politics, bitcoin is succumbing to it.

The biggest fights are focused on the most innovative element of bitcoin: the “blockchain”. This is a decentralised ledger of transactions using bitcoin. Bitcoin “miners” compete with one another to solve computationally hard problems. The winner receives new bitcoin but also validates a “block” of queued transactions, which is then added to the ledger and shared with the community.

Access the full article here.

Other Writing:

Essay

Do The Netroots Matter?

These should be good times for the netroots, the loose coalition of bloggers, MoveOn activists, and online organizers that sees itself as the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party. A Democrat is president for the first time in eight years, after using the Internet to organize volunteers and raise vast amounts of money. The Democratic ...
Read Article
Essay

Half Poulantzas, Half Kindleberger

Once upon a time, international political economy (as it is studied by American international relations professors) and international political economy (as it is studied by Marxists and marxisants) knew each other well. The realist Robert Gilpin, whose book on international political economy is still assigned in PhD seminars, disagreed with Marxism, but took it for ...
Read Article