What is it about?
This paper explores the gap between the original vision of Bitcoin as a decentralized, democratic financial system and the reality of how it functions today. Bitcoin was designed to empower individuals by removing the need for banks and governments, offering a fair and open financial network. However, over time, the process of mining Bitcoin—creating new coins and maintaining the network—has become increasingly centralized, controlled by large corporations and specialized technology. The study examines how Bitcoin mining evolved, from its early days as a hobbyist activity on personal computers to a multi-billion-dollar industry dominated by powerful players. It uses a framework inspired by Marx’s historical materialism to explain how the tools and organization of mining have shaped this transformation. Despite its promise of fairness, Bitcoin’s production has come to mirror many of the same inequalities it was meant to disrupt. By analyzing these competing visions of Bitcoin, the paper sheds light on the broader question of how technology and economic systems interact, often in ways that defy the original intentions of their creators.
Featured Image
Photo by Shubham Dhage on Unsplash
Why is it important?
This paper is unique because it tackles the evolving nature of Bitcoin from a sociological and historical perspective, rather than focusing solely on its technical or financial aspects. By applying Marx’s theory of historical materialism, it offers a fresh way to understand how technological advancements and economic pressures have shifted Bitcoin away from its founding ideals. It’s timely because Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are no longer niche interests; they’re reshaping global finance. As debates about decentralization, environmental impact, and financial inclusivity intensify, understanding Bitcoin’s trajectory helps us better navigate its future and the policies needed to guide it.
Perspectives
What I find most striking about this paper is how it reveals the unintended consequences of technological ideals. Bitcoin started as a radical experiment in decentralization, promising financial freedom and fairness. Yet, over time, the same economic forces it sought to escape—capital concentration, resource inequality, and systemic centralization—have crept back in. This irony is both fascinating and deeply human. I also appreciate how the paper links Bitcoin’s history to broader social and economic structures, showing that technology doesn’t exist in a vacuum. The shift from individual mining to corporate dominance reflects patterns we see throughout history, where new tools initially empower individuals but eventually consolidate power among a few. For me, this research highlights the importance of questioning how we design and adopt technology. Bitcoin’s story isn’t just about cryptocurrency—it’s about the tension between ideals and reality, between what we hope technology will achieve and the systems that shape its use. It’s a powerful reminder that even the most innovative ideas need constant scrutiny to stay aligned with their original values.
Dr. Adam Hayes
University of Lucerne
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Competing imaginaries: Crypto‐utopianism and the material forces of Bitcoin mining, Anthropology Today, July 2023, Wiley,
DOI: 10.1111/1467-8322.12825.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
