Bitcoin and Potosí Silver: Historical Perspectives on Cryptocurrency
Open accessAbstract
Bitcoin, the digital cryptocurrency, has been celebrated as the future of money on the Internet. Although Bitcoin does present several forward-looking innovations, it also integrates a very old concept into its digital architecture: the mining of precious metals. Even though Bitcoin explicitly invokes mining as a metaphor and gold as an example for understanding the cryptocurrency, there has been little critical work on the connections between Bitcoin and previous metalist currency regimes. The following essay proposes a historical comparison with colonial South American silver mining and the global currency regime based on the New World silver peso it created as a way to interrogate Bitcoin. The comparison with colonial South America, and specifically the silver mining economy around the Cerro Rico de Potosí, will help to develop a historical and political understanding of Bitcoin's stakes, including questions of resources, labor, energy, and ecology. Mining and the extractive apparatus that accompanies it always imply massive-scale earthworks that reshape the planet itself, a process known as terraforming. The Potosí comparison will reveal Bitcoin to form part of a similar process of digital primitive accumulation we can provisionally name cryptoforming.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Bitcoin mining is reproducing the general pattern of mining towards centralisation, as witnessed in the recent consolidation of bitcoin mining.
“In the process Zimmer shows how, despite all the talk of decentralization, bitcoin is reproducing the pattern of mining in general, which is towards centralisation, as witnessed in the bitcoin mining consolidation of the recent past.”
From In Digital We Trust: Bitcoin Discourse, Digital Currencies, and Decentralized Network Fetishism (2018) · cites this paper as Zimmer, 2017
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 28 · Cited by 56
- Authors
- Zimmer, Z.
- Corresponding author
- Zimmer, Zac
- ORCID
- Zimmer, Zac
- Venue
- Technology and Culture
- Publisher
- Project MUSE
- Published
- 2017
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 307-334
- ISSN
- 0040-165X (ISSN-L)
- 1097-3729
- OpenAlex
- W2644504898
- Cited by
- 56
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 6
- FWCI
- 14.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- Technology and Culture (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
- Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion)
- Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Economy and Marxism
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Cybernetics and Technology in Society
- Keywords
- Bitcoin, cryptocurrency, colonial South America, terraforming, extractivism, mining operations, monetary history
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review