Anarchy and Blockchain: Why Bakunin Would Reject Bitcoin — Analysis by Vadim Volkov
In a recent in-depth interview, Vadim Volkov, rector of the European University at St. Petersburg, sociologist, and author of the book "Anarchy, or Life Without a Boss," raised fundamental questions about the connection between classical anarchism and modern cryptocurrencies and blockchain. His analysis sheds light on key disagreements between ideological roots and technological realities.
From Proudhon to Smart Contracts: The Gap in Humanism
Volkov emphasizes that while crypto-anarchism grew out of the idea of minimizing trust and creating smart contracts, it does not directly inherit classical anarchism. The main difference is the disappearance of humanism. If Proudhon, Bakunin, and Kropotkin sought a lost paradise in the past, rejecting not only the state but also the market, competition, and inequality, crypto-anarchism replaces humans with algorithms and software code. "There is no human in this system at all," Volkov notes.
Why Cryptocurrencies Did Not Lead to Anarchy?
According to the sociologist, early anarchists failed to create a reliable infrastructure for decentralized communities. Crypto-anarchists, on the other hand, developed a technological foundation—blockchain and consensus algorithms. However, they mistakenly believed that creating infrastructure would automatically solve all problems. "Society does not quickly accept new tools, and any technology is inherently neutral. Its real meaning is determined by its use, which can be very far from the original intent," Volkov warns.
Right to Vote vs. Right to Exit
Volkov puts forward an important thesis for crypto-communities: priority should be given to internal ethical obligation, not the right to exit. If every participant can leave the project at any moment for their own benefit, long-term expectations collapse, and the social structure falls apart. "A true human community relies on ethics, not on attempts to fully algorithmize social connections," he argues.
The Future of Blockchain: Between Engineers and the State
The main problem for mass adoption of blockchain, according to Volkov, is the lack of user-friendly interfaces and intermediate technological links. Whoever invents these tools will solve the scalability problem. However, if independent engineers fail, the state will seize the initiative, adapting the ideas for its own purposes. "Such an approach would simply put the state in a position outside the game," he concludes.
Expert Opinion from Cryptalist: Volkov's analysis is a sobering cold shower for those who believe in automatic liberation through technology. His key conclusion is that classical anarchism and crypto-anarchism are different worlds, separated by a chasm in their attitude toward human nature and ethics. Blockchain is a powerful tool, but without a deep rethinking of social connections and responsibility, it risks becoming just another technology of control, not freedom.