Yes.
But not because of it's innovative nature and chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks.
Because it mimics today's fiat/ banking system.
So what that there is no fractional reserve system and it's not based on debt?
Enormous deflation takes care of these "problems", keeping poor people poor* and rich people rich.
Of course I might be completely wrong because of my frustration that it didn't make me rich, but the idea Satoshi Nakamoto had was that everyone could "print" some money. That worked at the beginning, but then, as Satoshi predicted, bitcoins became valuable and people started buying it for fiat money and they invested in better and better mining equipment: faster computers, pools, GPUs, FPGAs and ASICs. At some point it become impossible for common people to mine BTC - their only way to obtain it was to buy. From who? From companies and rich individuals that took role of FED, creator of the money. You could argue that they didn't create it from thin air, but I could argue they did - how else could you describe methods of ASICs manufacturers that were delivering their mining rigs only after they become almost obsolete, of course taking payments from their clients months before and unlawfully using their equipment? Now so called common folk has to do what regulators and money creators - exchanges/ pools/ mining farms owners - want him to do. If they decide they want BTC to become universal currency it'll happen.
Unless Satoshi has some surprise in store for us (don't forget his BTC stash).
* Of course it made many poor people rich, but what % of BTC users? And it wasn't even Bitcoin's goal, it's goal was to create level playing field.