Bitcoin, on the other hand, is something different. It's the thing I exclude from this thought, although, we have left it completely free, and we can see the mountains it has created with its price.
i don't see the connection to free markets. bitcoin's economic policy may be static and non-interventionist but it's just an asset or commodity. its economic policy has no bearing on whether
markets are free. that is determined by market interventions, regulations and other barriers to entry, welfare entitlements, subsidies, cronyism......
Very "Austrian" way of approaching things.
if you prescribe to a capitalist paradigm, then yes. the austrian school isn't just an economic theory but also a political philosophy that embraces private property, the subjective theory of value, and political individualism.
often forgotten in this conversation are left libertarians---like mutualists and other anarchists---who embrace political individualism and free markets but reject private property and the subjective theory of value. most anarchists would assert that capitalistic markets are not "free markets" at all because they are hierarchical. this is the gist of it:
We must stress here that not all anarchists are opposed to the market. Individualist anarchists favour it while Proudhon wanted to modify it while retaining competition. For many, the market equals capitalism but this is not the case as it ignores the fundamental issue of (economic) class, namely who owns the means of production. Capitalism is unique in that it is based on wage labour, i.e. a market for labour as workers do not own their own means of production and have to sell themselves to those who do. Thus it is entirely possible for a market to exist within a society and for that society not to be capitalist. For example, a society of independent artisans and peasants selling their product on the market would not be capitalist as workers would own and control their means of production. Similarly, Proudhon’s competitive system of self-managed co-operatives and mutual banks would be non-capitalist (and socialist) for the same reason. Anarchists object to capitalism due to the quality of the social relationships it generates between people (i.e. it generates authoritarian ones). If these relationships are eliminated then the kinds of ownership which do so are anarchistic.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/the-anarchist-faq-editorial-collective-an-anarchist-faq-10-17