Bitcoin and The Philosophy of Money: Evaluating the Commodity Status of Digital Currencies

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorBarber, Andrewen
dc.contributor.editorEngel, Saschaen
dc.contributor.editorLaney, Jordanen
dc.contributor.editorSzczurek, Anthonyen
dc.contributor.editorMatheis, Christianen
dc.date.accessioned2021-08-27T23:55:23Zen
dc.date.available2021-08-27T23:55:23Zen
dc.date.issued2015-09-01en
dc.description.abstractThe rhetoric in Satoshi Nakamoto's "White Paper" on the origins of Bitcoin suggests that the digital currency was envisioned as an entirely autonomous money. Due to the increase in popularity and circulation of Bitcoin and other digital currencies, an intense regulatory debate has been sparked at the global level. These debates reveal a fundamental tension regarding the role of the state in establishing money. While the digital currency community insists that Bitcoin is money, states and monetary authorities have declared Bitcoin a commodity, a declaration that can be traced back to Georg Friedrich Knapp's foundational text The State Theory of Money and reinforced by A. Mitchell Innes' The Credit Theory of Money. Circulating alongside state monies, Bitcoin is then neaccessory money,' unable to satisfy tax obligations and behaving as a commodity. This chartalist account of Bitcoin is refuted by what I identify as a libertarian/von Misean understanding of money motivating the circulation of digital currencies. I argue that the circulation of digital currencies is better explained by the chartalist narrative. I then prescribe Georg Simmel's Philosophy of Money, a broader understanding of money in which more abstract monies might create a supranational economic society, as an ideological alternative to digital currency advocates -- one that better conforms to the nature of money gestured to in Nakamoto's "White Paper". However, even through the lens of Simmel, the limitations imposed by domestic authorities and taxation prevent digital currencies from reaching the envisioned state of autonomy. Synthesizing these understandings of money, Bitcoin may exist as a compromise, a means of international money transfer that weakens the abstract, international economic borders created by state monies.en
dc.description.versionPublished versionen
dc.format.extent72 KBen
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/htmlen
dc.identifier.citationBarber, A., 2015. Bitcoin and The Philosophy of Money: Evaluating the Commodity Status of Digital Currencies. Spectra, 4(2). DOI: http://doi.org/10.21061/spectra.v4i2.241en
dc.identifier.doihttp://doi.org/10.21061/spectra.v4i2.241en
dc.identifier.eissn2162-8793en
dc.identifier.issue2en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/104819en
dc.identifier.volume4en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherVirginia Tech Publishingen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesStudent Publications Seriesen
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution 4.0 Internationalen
dc.rights.holderBarber, Andrewen
dc.rights.holderVirginia Techen
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en
dc.titleBitcoin and The Philosophy of Money: Evaluating the Commodity Status of Digital Currenciesen
dc.title.serialSpectraen
dc.typeArticle - Refereeden
dc.type.dcmitypeTexten

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Name:
spectra-v4.2-barber.html
Size:
71.95 KB
Format:
Hypertext Markup Language
Download

Collections

SPECTRA