Philosophical Dimension: Sovereignty and Digital Power
Bitcoin’s creation has sparked a reexamination of fundamental concepts like power, sovereignty, and individual agency in the digital age. Unlike traditional money that relies on trust in authorities, Bitcoin is “a philosophical machine disguised as money” . Its design flips the power hierarchy: where legacy systems demand trust in banks or governments, Bitcoin “converts trust into verification, authority into protocol, and hierarchy into visibility”, removing the need for top-down control . This empowers individuals by giving them direct control over their wealth through cryptographic keys, embodying the ideal of self-sovereignty. In the words of one author, “It is not that Bitcoin is made for making you rich; it is made for making you sovereign”, redefining what it means to be an individual in a digital world . Each user with a private key holds a form of digital power – “liberty encoded, property encrypted, consent expressed as a cryptographic signature”, as holding Bitcoin becomes akin to holding one’s own rights, free from institutional gatekeepers .
This philosophical shift means Bitcoin challenges the very concept of state monetary monopoly. It represents a separation of money from state, granting participants a new kind of autonomy. The Bitcoin network’s consensus rules cannot be arbitrarily changed by any authority, reflecting a system where power is diffuse and constrained by code. In essence, Bitcoin posits that freedom and financial sovereignty are achievable through technology: “define how your freedom will be determined, not by the institution but by the individual” . By removing intermediaries, Bitcoin empowers people to transact and save without needing permission – a profound redefinition of power in favor of the individual. This philosophical dimension has led some to compare Bitcoin’s societal impact to that of epochal inventions like the printing press, for it not only changes what we use (money) but also changes us, encouraging personal responsibility and agency in the digital realm .
Economic Power: Bitcoin as Money and Value
Bitcoin’s economic power lies in its role as a novel form of money – simultaneously a store of value, medium of exchange, and unit of account in the making. Supporters often call Bitcoin “digital gold,” highlighting its scarce supply (capped at 21 million) and its potential to hold value over time in the face of fiat currency inflation . Indeed, scarcity is central to Bitcoin’s design: its “programmed digital scarcity” ensures no central bank or miner can inflate the supply beyond what the code permits . This contrasts sharply with fiat money, which can be printed in unlimited quantities by governments, leading to depreciation of purchasing power. For example, the U.S. dollar has lost significant value over decades due to inflation, a problem Bitcoin aims to solve by enforcing hard scarcity . As one analysis notes, throughout history “good money has always been scarce and incorruptible, qualities exemplified by gold and, increasingly, digital assets like Bitcoin,” whereas fiat currencies can be created without limit . In this sense, Bitcoin challenges fiat by providing an alternative monetary system where value cannot be eroded by political decisions or central bank policies.
Bitcoin’s economic role is evolving. It has already proven itself as a store of value for many: despite high volatility, over a four-year horizon Bitcoin has historically appreciated, attracting investors seeking to hedge against currency debasement . Institutional investors like Paul Tudor Jones have likened Bitcoin to a “digital gold” and allocated funds to it as an inflation hedge . As of early 2024, research by Fidelity found that Bitcoin possesses the key attributes of a store of wealth – scarcity, durability, portability, divisibility – and is on a trajectory to mature into a widely trusted store of value . Its unit of account function is nascent (most goods aren’t priced in BTC yet), but in unstable economies, this is slowly changing: in parts of Venezuela, prices are posted in Bitcoin or satoshis, much as gold flakes and U.S. dollars circulate alongside the failing local currency . As a medium of exchange, Bitcoin faces hurdles (price volatility and throughput limits), but solutions like the Lightning Network are enabling faster, low-fee transactions to improve its usefulness for daily payments . Notably, some communities and online markets already use Bitcoin for remittances and commerce, especially where traditional banking is weak or overly restrictive.
Crucially, Bitcoin’s economic power is independent of any state – it exists and operates globally on the internet. This gives it a counter-establishment character: it provides a financial rail outside of government control. People in countries with hyperinflation or capital controls have turned to Bitcoin as a lifeline. For instance, in Lebanon’s recent banking crisis, citizens used Bitcoin to bypass withdrawal limits, valuing that “Bitcoin is protected by mathematics, fiat currencies are protected by governments” . In Venezuela, families have relied on Bitcoin or stablecoins to preserve savings amid a collapsing bolívar, and small businesses accept Bitcoin when banks cannot be trusted . These examples underscore how Bitcoin empowers individuals economically, acting as “financial freedom” for those who “want to go around the banking system” in dire times . In summary, Bitcoin is cultivating a form of economic power parallel to fiat: one rooted in decentralized trust and code-enforced scarcity, challenging the monopoly of traditional currencies and even gold as the default store of value.
Geopolitical Power: State Adoption, Control, and International Impact
Bitcoin’s rise also has significant geopolitical implications, as it intersects with state power and international finance. Some nations have cautiously embraced it, seeing strategic advantage or economic opportunity, while others perceive it as a threat to sovereign control over money. El Salvador is the landmark example of national adoption: in 2021 it became the first country to declare Bitcoin legal tender, requiring businesses to accept it alongside the US dollar . President Nayib Bukele framed Bitcoin as a path to financial inclusion and sovereignty – a bid to reduce reliance on the dollar and attract foreign investment. The government even launched a “Chivo” digital wallet and gave citizens $30 in Bitcoin to spur use . However, the outcome has been mixed. Adoption on the street has been limited due to volatility and low public understanding, and technical issues plagued the rollout . Under pressure from the IMF, El Salvador eventually dialed back mandatory acceptance of Bitcoin (businesses are no longer forced to accept it) as part of securing a loan . Still, Bukele continues to champion Bitcoin, and the country has even bought Bitcoin for its reserves and proposed a tax-free “Bitcoin City” to spur a crypto economy . This illustrates the geopolitical balancing act: a nation using Bitcoin to assert a form of monetary independence must weigh it against international institutions’ concerns about financial stability and illicit finance.
Several other countries have explored or adopted Bitcoin in various ways. The Central African Republic (CAR) announced Bitcoin as legal tender in 2022, aiming to follow El Salvador’s footsteps as a leap toward economic modernization, though implementation there has faced setbacks and international skepticism . On the flip side, powerful states like China have taken a hard-line stance. Citing financial stability risks and capital flight, China has banned cryptocurrency trading and mining within its borders . In 2021, China’s outright ban on Bitcoin mining (which had contributed up to 65–75% of the network’s hash power) sent miners scrambling to relocate overseas . This move was as much about reasserting control over capital and energy usage as it was about environmental concerns. India likewise flirted with bans: in 2018 the central bank forbade banks from dealing with crypto, only to have the Supreme Court overturn it in 2020 . India now imposes heavy taxes on crypto trades (30%) and has strict reporting requirements, effectively slowing the industry without a direct ban . Other countries enforcing strict or total bans (“red light” regimes) include Bangladesh, Algeria, and Egypt, often citing risks of money laundering and threats to their official currencies . According to a late-2025 analysis, globally cryptocurrency is fully legal in 45 countries, with varying degrees of restriction in others: 20 countries have it partially banned and 10 have generally banned it outright . This patchwork reflects how different governments perceive Bitcoin’s rise – either as a challenge to be contained or an innovation to be cautiously integrated.
Bitcoin also pressures the traditional mechanisms of monetary policy and international relations. Central banks, especially in smaller or economically unstable nations, worry that if their citizens adopt Bitcoin en masse, the bank’s ability to manage the money supply or act as lender of last resort erodes. For instance, Turkey, Argentina, and Nigeria – all facing high inflation – have seen surging grassroots Bitcoin usage as people hedge against currency depreciation. In Nigeria, despite the central bank’s attempts to restrict crypto, Bitcoin trading flourished in peer-to-peer markets as a workaround to strict forex controls . This has prompted Nigeria to regulate more pragmatically (recognizing crypto as securities in 2025) after earlier trying to suppress it . On the international stage, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies introduce a new factor in sanctions and global finance. Countries like Iran and North Korea have reportedly used crypto (through mining or hacking) to evade sanctions and acquire resources outside the US-dominated banking system – a small but notable shift in the geopolitics of finance. Meanwhile, major powers are responding with their own digital currency initiatives (e.g., China’s digital yuan, Europe’s proposed digital euro) to modernize and retain control, partly inspired by the crypto innovation but without ceding power to a decentralized network. Some policymakers fear that wider Bitcoin adoption could weaken the hegemony of the US dollar in international trade over time. While the dollar’s status is underpinned by the U.S. economy and military might (the “petrodollar” system), Bitcoin offers an apolitical alternative reserve asset. It’s telling that even central banks are paying attention: a few (like in Russia, reportedly) have considered holding small amounts of Bitcoin in reserves, and El Salvador’s central bank now holds Bitcoin. In summary, Bitcoin exerts a subtle but growing geopolitical force – empowering individuals and some maverick states, compelling others to react defensively, and adding a new dimension to how power and money intersect on the world stage.
Technological Power: The Proof-of-Work Network and Cryptographic Might
At its core, Bitcoin represents a massive deployment of computational power for a singular purpose: securing a decentralized consensus. The network runs on the Proof-of-Work (PoW) algorithm, which requires miners to perform intensive computations to validate blocks of transactions. This mechanism has made Bitcoin’s network one of the most powerful computational assemblies in history. In fact, as of late 2025 the Bitcoin network’s total hashing power reached an astonishing 1,082 exahashes per second (EH/s) . To put that in perspective, this is on the order of 10^21 hash operations per second – a figure so large that, when converted into a measure of general computing, it was estimated that Bitcoin’s network operates at roughly 7.8 exaFLOPS, over 3,000 times the combined power of the world’s top 300 supercomputers . (Note: these hashes are specialized computations, not directly comparable to scientific computing FLOPS, but they illustrate Bitcoin’s sheer scale.) This “wall of computation” serves as an ironclad defense: altering Bitcoin’s transaction history would require overwhelming this global network of miners, an almost impossible feat given the cost and scale. Each additional hash reinforces the ledger’s integrity, and the network self-adjusts its difficulty to ensure a steady creation of new blocks (~every 10 minutes) regardless of short-term fluctuations in mining power.
The technological robustness of Bitcoin extends beyond raw hash power. It is undergirded by strong cryptographic systems. Transactions are secured by public-private key cryptography: only someone with the correct private key can send the Bitcoin from a given address, making ownership of Bitcoin a form of control over information (a private key). The cryptographic signature (using ECDSA and SHA-256 hashing) ensures that Bitcoin transactions are tamper-proof and verifiable by anyone. The blockchain itself – an append-only ledger – has proven remarkably resilient: Bitcoin’s ledger has never been successfully hacked since its launch in 2009, a testament to the soundness of its cryptographic design . In essence, Bitcoin replaces institutional trust with computational trust. Thousands of nodes around the world independently verify each block of transactions against the consensus rules, meaning no central party can falsify or censor the ledger without the rest of the network rejecting it . This decentralization of validation (tens of thousands of full nodes) means there is no single point of failure or control – a stark contrast to centralized databases or payment networks that a government or company can shut down. The network’s security model relies on game theory and economic incentives: miners expend real resources (electricity and hardware) to earn rewards, and the cost to attack the network would far exceed any potential gain . As a result, Bitcoin has achieved what was previously thought nearly impossible: decentralized agreement on “who owns what” with no central authority, sustained by open-source code and globally distributed computing.
Bitcoin’s technological power has also fostered a large infrastructure industry: specialized mining facilities housing tens of thousands of ASIC (Application-Specific Integrated Circuit) machines humming 24/7. These mining rigs, often clustered in regions with cheap electricity, collectively form a new kind of power center – not political, but computational. In recent years, mining operations have professionalized and even diversified: large publicly traded mining companies in the U.S. have market capitalizations in the tens of billions , and they are beginning to leverage their equipment for other high-performance computing tasks like AI during off-peak times . This demonstrates how Bitcoin’s computational network is “nation-state ready security”, as one observer put it, with massive data centers dedicated to securing the network . It’s akin to a digital defense infrastructure – one built not by governments but by a loose coalition of miners and node operators driven by mutual self-interest and protocol rules. In summary, Bitcoin wields digital power through technology: a globally synchronized, cryptographically secured network that marshals more computing power than anything before it to uphold the integrity of its currency system. This unprecedented alignment of code, computers, and economic incentives showcases a new form of power – one that is hard to shut down, hard to subvert, and open for anyone to participate in.
Energetic Power: Electricity into Trust and the Energy Implications
Bitcoin’s proof-of-work mechanism transforms energy into decentralized trust, effectively using electricity as the anchor of its security. By design, mining Bitcoin is energy-intensive: the network currently consumes on the order of 138–175 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity per year, roughly 0.5% of global electricity consumption, comparable to the power usage of a medium-sized country like Poland . This energy is not wasted in the context of the system’s goals; rather, it is the cost paid to achieve a censorship-resistant, tamper-proof ledger. Each block mined represents a verifiable expenditure of energy, which in turn makes the block (and its transactions) exceedingly costly to rewrite or falsify. In essence, Bitcoin converts electrical power into “digital gold” – a secure record of value – much as physical gold mining converts work and energy into a scarce precious metal. This process has been described as Bitcoin being “backed by electricity”, since real-world energy investment creates a floor for Bitcoin’s value and security . The current estimated cost to mine one Bitcoin (given hardware and electricity) is on the order of tens of thousands of dollars, which means an attacker would have to burn a similar magnitude of money (and energy) to even attempt to double-spend or disrupt the network . Such an attack would be economically irrational under most conditions . Thus, energy expenditure is fundamental to Bitcoin’s “thermodynamic security” – it’s what makes cheating prohibitively expensive and honest consensus the norm.
The implications of this energy use are widely debated. Critics argue that Bitcoin’s energy footprint is environmentally unsustainable, pointing to the carbon emissions from predominantly fossil-fueled mining operations. For example, before China’s mining ban in 2021, the dominance of coal-powered mining in China meant a large carbon footprint; when mining relocated to places like Kazakhstan and parts of the U.S. with fossil-heavy grids, the share of renewable energy in Bitcoin mining initially fell . However, the landscape is changing. A 2025 Cambridge University study found that 52.4% of Bitcoin’s mining energy now comes from sustainable sources (including 42.6% renewables and 9.8% nuclear) . In fact, coal’s share in the energy mix for mining dropped from ~40% to under 9% between 2022 and 2023, with natural gas and renewables taking larger roles . This suggests that Bitcoin mining is increasingly tapping cleaner energy and even acting as a driver for renewable development in certain cases. Because miners seek the cheapest energy, they often use power that is stranded or excess – for instance, some mining farms use surplus hydroelectric power during the wet season in China (previously) or curtailed wind/solar energy that grids can’t otherwise use. There are examples of miners partnering with oil drillers to use flared natural gas (which would otherwise be burned off wastefully) to generate electricity for mining, thereby reducing net emissions. These trends complicate the simple “Bitcoin vs environment” narrative: Bitcoin can incentivize energy efficiency and the capture of waste energy, even though its absolute consumption is high .
Philosophically, Bitcoin’s energy usage ties into the idea of monetary thermodynamics: it’s creating a form of money that is costly to produce, much like gold was costly to mine. This costliness is what gives it resistance to debasement. Unlike fiat money which can be created at virtually no cost (just keystrokes at a central bank), Bitcoin requires work and energy – adhering to a sort of “conservation of energy” principle in money . Proponents argue this makes Bitcoin sound money, aligning with natural laws of scarcity. Indeed, some analysts note that the energy-based security ensures Bitcoin “respects the universal law of conservation of energy” in a monetary sense . Nevertheless, the environmental externalities cannot be ignored. At ~162 TWh/year, Bitcoin mining’s CO₂ emissions have been estimated around 40 million tons CO₂ annually – though this is less than 0.1% of global emissions, it’s significant for a single digital system. Efforts are underway in the mining industry to become carbon-neutral, whether by purchasing carbon offsets or exclusively using renewables. Moreover, as mining hardware becomes more efficient (ASIC technology improvements) and if price stabilizes, energy growth may level off. It’s also worth noting that other human activities consume comparable or greater energy without similar scrutiny: for instance, the global banking and data center industries each use a few percent of global electricity (several times Bitcoin’s consumption), and gold mining is estimated to use a similar order of energy when you include extraction and refinement . Bitcoin’s energetic footprint, while large, is the deliberate trade-off for an open, borderless financial network. In summary, Bitcoin wields energy as power – literally – turning electricity into a solid foundation for digital trust. The ongoing challenge is ensuring this process becomes as sustainable and efficient as possible, so that the “decentralized security” it buys with energy does not come at too high an environmental cost.
Comparative Analysis: Bitcoin vs. Traditional Forms of Power
Bitcoin’s multifaceted nature allows it to be compared with various traditional sources of power, from money to physical force. The table below summarizes how Bitcoin contrasts with fiat currency, gold, military force, and centralized computing infrastructure along key dimensions:
| Aspect | Bitcoin (Digital Power) | Fiat Money | Gold | Military Force | Centralized Computing |
| Control & Governance | Decentralized network; no central authority – rules set by code and consensus . Individuals self-custody assets with private keys. | Centralized issuance by governments/central banks; policy can change money supply at will. Users depend on banks to hold and transfer funds. | No issuing authority (natural scarcity). Historically governed by market and institutions (mints, banks) for custody. | Hierarchical control by state/government; command structure dictates use of force. Power concentrated in nation-states’ militaries. | Centralized ownership (Big Tech or state) of data centers. Control lies with corporations or governments running the servers. |
| Supply/Scarcity | Fixed supply of 21 million BTC; provably scarce and predictable inflation (halving every 4 years). | Potentially unlimited; can be expanded at political discretion (inflationary bias). Supply depends on monetary policy (e.g. QE, interest rates). | Finite on Earth but unknown exact quantity. Annual supply grows ~1–2% from mining. Hard to dramatically increase supply quickly. | Limited by economic resources (budget, manpower). Not a “supply” in numeric sense, but expansion constrained by funding and technology. | Effectively unlimited compute can be added by investing capital. Capacity expands with Moore’s Law and investment – not inherently scarce (aside from chip supply limits). |
| Security/Backing | Backed by cryptographic proof and energy (PoW). Security through math and electricity: costly to attack, secured by global miners . Trust anchored in code, not violence. | Backed by government decree (“legal tender” laws) and public trust in issuing state’s stability. Indirectly supported by state’s economy (and coercive power like tax requirements). | Intrinsic value from physical properties (use in jewelry/industry) and historical trust as money. No issuer, but secure in that gold’s value is rooted in universal acceptance and difficulty to counterfeit. | Backed by force – weapons and troops. Its “value” is the ability to compel outcomes physically. Secured by a country’s economic strength (to fund it) and technology. Power enforced by threat of violence. | Backed by infrastructure and maintenance. Requires electricity and internet; data centers protected by corporations/states. Not self-justifying – it serves other applications (business, science), not value storage by itself. |
| Censorship & Seizure Resistance | Highly censorship-resistant: no central party can block transactions; if you hold your keys, your Bitcoin cannot be seized without your consent (requires access to keys) . Network is borderless and permissionless. | Transactions can be blocked or accounts frozen by banks or authorities. Money can be seized or frozen by court order or capital controls. Cross-border transfers require permission (SWIFT, banks) and can be censored. | Physical gold can be confiscated by governments (e.g. historical gold bans) or stolen. Not easy to move secretly in large quantities due to weight and visibility. Limited censorship issues, but not usable remotely. | Military force is the means of seizure/censorship in the physical realm. It is used to confiscate assets or enforce laws. The concept of censorship applies differently: militaries impose will by force, including shutting down communications or trade routes. | Centralized servers and internet infrastructure can be censored or shut down by those in control or by government order. Data can be deleted, accounts banned, services denied. Users have little recourse if a provider decides to cut off access. |
| Mobility & Global Reach | Highly portable and global: can be sent anywhere in the world in minutes over the internet. No need to transport physical atoms; indifferent to borders (just need network access). Ideal for remote and cross-border transactions. | Relatively restricted by borders: moving money internationally is subject to exchange controls, regulations, and banking networks. Within a country, easy digital transfer, but cash is physical and cumbersome in large amounts. | Low portability: heavy and bulky to transport. Moving gold across borders is slow and often requires security and declarations. However, universally recognized value anywhere on globe. | Can project power globally only with great effort: requires bases, logistics, or missiles. Most military power is local or regional; only superpowers have true global reach. Troops and equipment must physically travel, which is slow and resource-intensive. | Data and services can be accessed globally via the internet (cloud computing serves worldwide), but the infrastructure itself is fixed in specific locations. Users are globally connected, yet reliant on networks that can be segmented or firewalled by authorities. |
| Energy Requirement | Energy-intensive by design: approx. 0.5% of global electricity to maintain network . Energy use provides security (makes network costly to attack). Moves the burden of trust from institutions to energy expenditure. | Minimal energy to create money (digital bookkeeping or printing presses). The banking system uses energy (data centers, bank branches), but energy use is not what secures fiat’s value – state authority does. | Significant energy and labor required to mine and refine gold (digging, processing). This gives gold a cost-basis, somewhat analogous to Bitcoin. Once mined, gold’s value doesn’t require energy to maintain (just secure storage). | Extremely energy-intensive: militaries consume vast fuel for vehicles, aircraft, naval fleets, plus energy to produce weapons and run bases. This is a direct consumption of energy to project power (e.g., jet fuel, tank gas). Without energy (oil/electricity), modern military power diminishes. | High energy usage: global data centers consume roughly 1–2% of global electricity. Power is needed for servers, cooling, etc. Unlike Bitcoin, this energy isn’t creating a singular asset, but supporting many services. Outages or energy limits constrain computing power availability. |
| Key Strength | Decentralization and incorruptibility: no single point of failure or control; resilient store of value immune to inflation or censorship. Empowers individuals globally with direct financial sovereignty. | Flexibility and stability (in mature economies): governments can manage supply to stabilize economies; widely accepted for taxes and payments due to legal status. Infrastructure (banks) in place for convenient everyday use. | Tangible and time-tested: centuries of trust and value storage. No reliance on technology or internet. Intrinsic physical commodity that has uses and cannot be conjured from nothing. | Coercive power: ability to enforce rules and defend interests in the physical world. Deters adversaries and compels outcomes where diplomacy or economics fail. Fundamental to state sovereignty. | Efficiency and scale: enormous computational capability for diverse tasks (science, commerce). Central control allows optimization and rapid deployment of resources. Powers the internet services and data processing that modern society relies on. |
| Key Limitation | Scalability and volatility: network throughput is limited (improving with Layer-2 tech), and price swings prevent it from being a stable unit of account yet. Requires internet and electricity access. Still emerging in public understanding and trust. | Vulnerable to mismanagement: can be inflated (eroding value) or rendered worthless by hyperinflation. Relies on trust in authorities, which can be abused. Subject to political whims and can fail in crises (bank freezes). | Cumbersome and outdated for modern economy: not easily divisible or transportable for daily trade. Subject to physical theft. Supply can increase (albeit slowly), and market can be manipulated by large holders or nations. | Destructive and zero-sum: relies on threat or use of violence, which can lead to conflict and human cost. Extremely expensive to maintain. Ineffective against decentralized digital threats. Cannot directly influence digital transactions or value transfer. | Central points of failure: systems can crash or be hacked. Users must trust the operator. Subject to surveillance and control by operators or governments. Not a store of value in itself, just a tool – if trust in provider is lost, power dissipates quickly. |
Table: Bitcoin compared with traditional sources of power (fiat currency, gold, military force, and centralized computation) across various attributes. Each column illustrates how Bitcoin both mirrors and diverges from these legacy forms of power. Notably, Bitcoin blends characteristics of money (like fiat and gold) – serving as a currency and store of value – with characteristics of a power structure – using energy and computation akin to an industrial or military endeavor, yet without a central commander. This unique synthesis is what makes the study of Bitcoin as “digital power” so compelling.
In summary, Bitcoin represents a new paradigm of power that straddles multiple domains. Philosophically, it empowers the individual over institutions. Economically, it challenges inflationary fiat and even gold by offering an asset of verifiable scarcity. Geopolitically, it forces states to respond, whether through adoption, regulation, or bans, and it offers a Plan B for populations in monetary crisis. Technologically, Bitcoin has created the world’s strongest computing network to secure its operations, showcasing the might of decentralized consensus. Energetically, it transforms vast amounts of electricity into a bulwark of trust, raising important questions about sustainability versus the value of an open monetary network. And when contrasted with traditional powers – from the printing press of central banks to the hard power of militaries – Bitcoin emerges as a hybrid: a form of digital power grounded in code, consensus, and energy, whose influence is rapidly growing in our modern world.
Sources: The analysis above incorporates insights from a range of sources, including academic studies, industry reports, and journalistic investigations. Key references include a Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance report on Bitcoin’s energy mix , data on Bitcoin’s hash rate and security from Cryptorank and Reddit analyses , discussions of Bitcoin’s philosophical underpinnings and individual sovereignty from Mohsen Sobhani’s Bitcoin Beyond Money , comparisons of Bitcoin with gold and fiat from industry research , as well as real-world examples of nation-state adoption and regulation from the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists and others . These sources (and those cited throughout the text) provide a factual basis for understanding Bitcoin’s role as a new kind of power in the 21st century.