The Bitcoin Economy— It's neither Capitalism nor Communism

[Ucy]

Here is an idea what is going on in the minds and spaces of many business men and women who want to seriously get involved in Bitcoin/crypto or bring in investors or so called venture capitalists.

After considering the real purpose of Bitcoin and its ideals they realize they conflict with what they are used to in fiat world — capitalism. They try to see how they can make their businesses fit in, then it begins to feel like communism... they panicked, fearing that if they end up building successful businesses that are according to that ideals, capitalism will be threatened and it will seem like the communists were right afterall. This is devastating to them, and they are willing to do whatever it takes to prevent such businesses from succeeding.
They are only left with few options if they must get involved in Bitcoin business, either run their businesses in capitalist manner, which would mean building custodial platforms,  centralizing the platforms, doing kyc, getting bitcoin developers to do their bidding in the name of economic power, operate like dictators since they're "private businesses", etc, but all these completely contradict the Bitcoin's purpose and ideals,. And the other option: is to allow the community co-own and run the businesses, and this to them is communism. The smarter ones choose a somewhat balanced approach, which is Instant Exchange-like platforms. They still own and operate their businesses alone, but choose the p2p approach which means they avoid holding people's fund, and avoid kyc lots of times.


An ideal Bitcoin business/company is neither communism nor capitalism.
Even though the community becomes part of the business, the ownership right is not taken away from the real owner. The community are merely stakeholders or shareholders, can however have a say on how the company is run depending on their contributions. The company has to be run according to the owner's roadmap, or how the owner wants it to be run, as long as it does not violate the Bitcoin ideals. Whatever the members build has to be within the roadmap boundary.
The company is not centralized, does not violate users privacy, anyone can participate in its running with little to no permission, it's run transparently and trustlessly. This feels more like a balanced approach between capitalism and communism since a company owner remains a company owner even though other people can permissionlessly get involved and determine its future development.

[BlackHatCoiner]

Wait, is this an original thought of yours? I very recently met a person in real life who told me this exact same vision, and we had an argument (I basically told him it was communism what he described, but he corrected me that it is capitalism.)

And I remember him telling me that it's because of modern technology that we can build this. The company example was cattle farm, and the monthly contribution of each individual would be something like $1/month, so the company would be making $1 million / month with 1 million red meat fans.  


If it's not you, nevermind.    

The problem with this proposal is that there's something called State, and it can intervene in between.

[Alpha Marine]

The problem now is that Bitcoin is as capitalist as hell. It is something that people get what they work for. One person can buy half the Bitcoin in circulation if he has the money and people sell to him. This is hypothetical, of course, but it shows how capitalist Bitcoin is.
It is rewarded to people for doing nothing. Even the miners that are "rewarded" have to work for it and even incur losses.
The fact that Bitcoin is communal doesn't mean it has traces or features of communism.
In capitalism, the prices of things are controlled by market forces, and that is exactly what goes on with Bitcoin. The community in this case is the market.

Even though the community becomes part of the business, the ownership right is not taken away from the real owner. The community are merely stakeholders or shareholders, can however have a say on how the company is run depending on their contributions. The company has to be run according to the owner's roadmap, or how the owner wants it to be run, as long as it does not violate the Bitcoin ideals. Whatever the members build has to be within the roadmap boundary.

Except I don't fully understand what you mean, but what you describe is similar to a publicly traded company. Thousands or millions of people own parts of the company, but there is a major ownership or management that controls and runs the company. They will run the company in a way to make the shareholders happy or they will leave or demand a change of management.

[Italian Panic]

In my view, Bitcoin is an extremely democratic concept; there is no other instrument, not even a centralised state, that has guaranteed such a high degree of meritocracy to individuals. Furthermore, it allows people to manage their own funds with complete autonomy, without the need for third parties, which is an absolute strength and a democratically inviolable principle.
As the greek term for democracy (demos and kratos) suggests that is, power to the people, Bitcoin guarantees precisely this: total self control and total autonomy.
Furthermore, thanks to its economic cycles, Bitcoin also ensures that there is always an opportunity to re enter the market; that is, when we experience drawdowns and bear markets, these are all signals that Bitcoin sends us to get involved. Of course, the bar is always being raised, but ultimately it is the long term that counts.

[trendcoin]

Bitcoin is much closer to capitalism... First and foremost, it is not a system of equal distribution, but one where early adopters, risk-takers, and those who invest capital are the ones who win. The idea of communism embraces the principle of equality as its central tenet. Capitalism envisions rewards resulting from the free choices people make under free market conditions. Furthermore, to engage in Bitcoin mining, you must belong to a privileged class. This situation is completely incompatible with communism. When I look at Bitcoin, I don’t see even a trace of communism...

[Coyster]

I am not sure how appropriate it is to describe bitcoin or CASP's as either of these economic and political systems. But for the sake of argument, capitalism makes more sense to me, i mean, everyone is allowed to own bitcoin, based on what they can afford, thus we have whales with thousands of bitcoins and me, with just a few sats.

CASP's still fall in the same line, devs decide if their software would be open source or closed source, non-custodial or custodial, etc. That's an economy built on competition if you ask me, freedom right.

[Smartprofit]

As far as I know, under communism (when people accept this social system), there will be no money. It will be a world of abundance, and everyone will have free access to all the benefits of civilization. The development of technology (especially artificial intelligence) and the elimination of the need for exploitation of human labor are leading us to communism. 🙋

Bitcoin (like other currencies) will become unnecessary under communism.

But under late capitalism, Bitcoin is certainly in demand. Bitcoin is used in situations where it is impossible to use the financial instruments of the traditional financial system. A typical example: there is a war in your country, your house has been bombed, your bank accounts are frozen, and you urgently need to flee to another country. In this situation, Bitcoin is the ideal financial instrument to solve your problems.

Using Bitcoin the way Michael Saylor does is, in my opinion, foolish. However, if a civil war breaks out in the US, Bitcoin will become one of the most valuable assets for Americans. Bitcoin is a hedge.  Bitcoin is hedging against the potential collapse of the modern financial capitalist system. That's how I see it. 🧖

[Plutomanian]

Bitcoin is much closer to capitalism... First and foremost, it is not a system of equal distribution, but one where early adopters, risk-takers, and those who invest capital are the ones who win. The idea of communism embraces the principle of equality as its central tenet. Capitalism envisions rewards resulting from the free choices people make under free market conditions. Furthermore, to engage in Bitcoin mining, you must belong to a privileged class. This situation is completely incompatible with communism. When I look at Bitcoin, I don’t see even a trace of communism...

Bitcoin is dispersed network which it's rules is applicable to everyone and there's absolutely no specific equal rewards to people holding Bitcoin. It rewards is simply for those that are patient, how they enter the market and how they're able to take risks and know the huge involvement of the market. It's very important we noticed that Bitcoin similarities is push towards the direction of capitalism other than communism because Bitcoin is closer to capitalism.

For us to own Bitcoin in the market, we do not need the approval of the government or any third party, every transaction is between us and crypto exchange we're using, making us to be solely independent and not following the public doing what they do. We make our research and push further to accompanying our goals.

[snowpega]

The majority of the people who are in the crypto space bring privacy to the top of their priorities. Due to many reasons that vary from person to person. As we also know, the importance of privacy for safe and best survival in the crypto space. We have seen a lot of incidents and event where disclosing that you are attached to the crypto space becomes a threat to you and your loving ones. So wise people always try their best to keep their crypto assets private from public sight, right?

And in the case of what you are talking about, there is nothing wrong with starting a business that also supports Bitcoin as a means of payment. But using a custodial, KYC, and centralized path using Bitcoin for your business is never a secure way or recommended way, in my point of view. It is the same as being controlled, tracked, or handing over your whole system to a third person's hands. And sadly, regulators and governments are trying their best to sign such rules and laws that are bringing the crypto space toward a more centralized way. This is my point of view. DYOR!

[Darker45]

I think I have a fundamental issue with this. While capitalism and communism may be construed differently, with the prevailing view, it seems this is misleading.

Equating centralization with capitalism, for example, is probably erroneous. With communism, which is overwhelmingly Marxist in mainstream understanding, centralization couldn't be more centralized.

Moreover, "custodial platforms,  centralizing the platforms, doing kyc, getting bitcoin developers to do their bidding in the name of economic power, operate like dictators" sound to me more communism than capitalism.

On the contrary, the free market, privatization, minimal intervention, deregulation, and the like are more on the side of capitalism than communism.

[stompix]

The problem now is that Bitcoin is as capitalist as hell. It is something that people get what they work for.

And this is a problem because?
Oh wait, we need to put some quotas on how much Bitcoin one can have, we need to make transaction fees based on the amount sent, we need an annual fee on holdings over 1 Bitcoin, and of course, we need to tax miners and nodes and eveyone and the revenue most be spent on the glory of the socialist utopia.

Bitcoin works so great because it is pure capitalism, include any commie or socialist thoughts in it and it will crumble and fail.

An ideal Bitcoin business/company is neither communism nor capitalism.

Companies are not communist or capitalist, they are public, private or state-owned.
The economy in which this company is doing its business can be a free market economy or a planned, centralized commie economy.

[pooya87]

Over the years I keep seeing people insist on comparing Bitcoin with other stuff that have nothing to do with (don't fall in the same category) from religions to political systems and it never made any sense to me. Bitcoin is just a payment system. It is not a type of government or an economic system. It's just a payment system, or a tool. Any business built using this "tool" can be anything or defined in weird ways through the eyes of capitalists or communists or others but that doesn't mean the "tool" itself can be analyzed that way.

[viljy]

Capitalism and communism are modes of production and the emergence of value. Bitcoin was originally intended for monetary transactions. So, we can only discuss how well such a payment system aligns with a particular mode of production. Under capitalism, Bitcoin acts as a commodity. That is, it does not fully meet its intended purpose.

Under communism (if it ever existed), the concept of a commodity does not exist at all, just as the market does not exist, and a payment system is not needed. By the way, we shouldn’t confuse communism and socialism. By the way, we shouldn’t confuse communism and socialism. The difference between them lies in the issue of ownership of the means of production. Socialism is super‑capitalism (there is one capitalist, and that is the state; there are no other differences).

An economic system in which Bitcoin would be like a fish in water does not yet exist and never has. The characteristic features of such a system are: no debt/loans, and therefore no inflation; a small market in terms of volume, where mainly unique products are sold. Everything else is produced in abundance through robotic manufacturing and distributed in accordance with the social rating. Something like that, roughly speaking.

edit:
Here’s a rough analogy. You’re a child; your parents feed and clothes you (robotic production). However, your behavior must be good (social rating). You also have your own little child‑world where you play and trade with other children (a small market). The money you use is gum wrappers (Bitcoin), and the goods are all sorts of unique and amazing things that some children trade with others (a homemade slingshot; a beautiful pebble, etc.). These things can be found somewhere or created on your own. In such a society, personal property is possible only for this. Everything else (housing, transport, etc.) Belongs either to the state or to some communities and is provided for use (i.e., it is not possible to own or dispose of it). And most importantly: the state is governed by AI.

[fruktik]

Bitcoin is much closer to capitalism... First and foremost, it is not a system of equal distribution, but one where early adopters, risk-takers, and those who invest capital are the ones who win. The idea of communism embraces the principle of equality as its central tenet. Capitalism envisions rewards resulting from the free choices people make under free market conditions. Furthermore, to engage in Bitcoin mining, you must belong to a privileged class. This situation is completely incompatible with communism. When I look at Bitcoin, I don’t see even a trace of communism...

In my country, a singer from the Soviet era once sang the words: "Communism is a second fascism." I fully agree with that statement. It is impossible to build a successful business under such a regime; it simply cannot be done. That era is a thing of the past. The experience of communism in the country demonstrated that it is a losing proposition. Nothing was actually built or brought to fruition—it was merely the mindless copying of foreign technologies. Why do all initiatives fail under communism? If a researcher shows initiative, they immediately end up on the security services' watchlist. Standing out from the crowd is not tolerated. That is precisely what fascism is.

[Zlantann]

Bitcoin is much closer to capitalism... First and foremost, it is not a system of equal distribution, but one where early adopters, risk-takers, and those who invest capital are the ones who win. The idea of communism embraces the principle of equality as its central tenet. Capitalism envisions rewards resulting from the free choices people make under free market conditions. Furthermore, to engage in Bitcoin mining, you must belong to a privileged class. This situation is completely incompatible with communism. When I look at Bitcoin, I don’t see even a trace of communism...

Who wins depends on why you use Bitcoin. If your goal is to make a profit, then I would agree that early adopters who still hold their coins and those who invest heavily are likely winners. But when it comes to using Bitcoin as a tool for freedom and privacy, most people have an equal opportunity. The network gives everyone unrestricted access to a decentralized financial system.

For us to own Bitcoin in the market, we do not need the approval of the government or any third party, every transaction is between us and crypto exchange we're using, making us to be solely independent and not following the public doing what they do. We make our research and push further to accompanying our goals.

Remember that crypto exchanges are regulated by the government. So we can assume that these centralized platforms serve as a middleman between the government and users. Your information can be submitted to the government if requested.