Nah. Bitcoin is too Communist for eBay.
Tell that to the libertarians here
It seems very capitalistic to me. As with any other currency, there's a small number of people with huge stashes ruining things for everyone else, such as by dirty tricks like dumping about 25000BTC onto a rising market last night, and manipulating the price with huge ask/bid walls.
Its not communist or capitalist - its just a currency. It is for sure a demon for Keynesianists, which usually label themselves as "left wing economists", as the ability to inflate the currency is a must for the Keynesianist "stimulus strategy" in crisis times, which is a central point of Keynesianism.
That said, a communist government would never accept a national currency they cannot fully control - on the contrary, libertarian capitalists or more generially austrian echonomy followers would embrace it with joy.
Anyhow, I can see anarchists/communists/anti-capitalists supporting Bitcoin just because is a "bank killer", and right now the financial elites are the ones ruling the world, so we could say that Bitcoin could turn upside down the current status quo, which might be a desiderable intermediate step for communists/anarchists/anti-capitalists in general. Bitcoin would never been the end goal for anti-capitalists, but it could be a first step to radically change the power balances in the world.
Who owns Bitcoin?
It is Anarcho Syndicalist.
Communism simply means that workers control the means of production, instead of a State (Nationalism), or rentiers (Capitalism).
Communism isn't a dirty word. Get over it.
And Keynsian economics just means that you have a bigger toolbox, it does not preclude other economic systems.
Sorry, but no.
Anarcho-syndicalism = workers control the means of production. You work in a factory - you control directly the production process, you participate directly in the decision making and you OWN the fruit of your labour.
Communism =
social ownership of means of production. It might seem similar, but its not at all - as a worker you do not "own" the means of production nor the fruits of your labour in a communist system, the "society" does, which basically means that the State owns them. That's why Bakunin said communism was going to be "the biggest lie of the Century", and it even said communism was just a form of "state capitalism", as the worker did not control the means of production nor the fruit of his labour. An exception would be Pannekoek's council communism, which was totally opposed to russian bolshevism, and was in many ways much closer to Kropotkin's and Bakunnin's anarcho-communism.
And again: Bitcoin is just a currency, and it has no political sign - but saying is "anarcho-syndicalist" is simply wrong. Most of original anarchists (or "left" anarchists, as some would say, especially in the US) wouldn't even use money as we know it (an exception would be Proudhon's mutualism), in fact during the most relevant anarcho-syndicalist experience in history (Aragón, Spain: 1930-1938) the "Peseta" of the Spanish Republica was not used at all. They had no currency nor legal tender, they just seldomly issued their own "money" which were just vouchers or IOU's with very specific uses. And BTW: anarcho-syndicalism is just a WAY or STRATEGY to reach "anarchy", or "anarcho-communism" or "libertarian communism", as many US folks like to name them to distinguish them from their very own, ill-named "anarcho-capitalism")
Fascinating experience BTW (the one in Aragón), it was a pity that both the spanish fascists and the KPSS (Russian communists) joined forced to crush what could have been one of the most relevant and game-changing revolutions in Europe's history.
Sorry of the OT, folks.
