I am not sure I follow the theoretical thread about capitalism versus socialism, as bitcoin has a desirable theoretical impulse behind it but in reality, it not being tethered to a government or valuable assets, will end up causing losses for many, especially in a down market.
The promise of bitcoin was to create a currency untethered from government or the banking systems. The idea is that banks and governments and financial institutions exact outsize rents and impose significant agency costs to the detriment of consumers. That doesn't appear to help either capitalism or socialism, by the way. But intermediaries exist in every economic system. I think we need to be careful with theory - practicality and realism matters.
So bitcoin transactions get placed on a blockchain ledger, which is transparent to everyone. And there are at least as promised limited numbers of bitcoins which can be mined, which in theory permits buyers to somehow value their purchases as a scarce item. And as the OneCoin fraudsters - a MLM which was not a MLM - and was a Ponzi - a blockchain ledger cannot be created to record transactions already executed. And One Coin was selling coins which had not been mined - in this case - selling air.
I think there is a difference between bitcoin and One Coin. The MLM aspect seems to be lacking, and there likely is more integrity in terms of exceeding the stated coin mining limit. But this doesn't mean Bitcoin makes sense.
There is promise in the idea. Reminds me of the open source software movement when it arrived - no one thought anyone would pay for copyrighted software again. It has evolved to a hybrid of software, but to be sure, nothing is ever really free. I think reality, however, is going to turn out badly here. I think Ex L comments are on the mark. I also agree with Precious Roy's tangible statement that crypto coins will not suffice for currency, notwithstanding in limited instances some entities accept them as payment.
