Would Ben Franklin Have Adopted Bitcoin?

Benjamin Franklin—printer, inventor, statesman, and all-around Renaissance man—lived in an era of quill pens and gold coins, not blockchains and private keys. But if we dropped him into 2025, would he have cheered for Bitcoin? Given his track record as a skeptic of centralized power, a lover of practical innovation, and a fierce defender of individual liberty, there’s a strong case he’d have been a fan. Let’s break it down through Franklin’s lens.

A Money Man with a Sharp Eye

Franklin knew money mattered. As a printer, he literally made it—crafting colonial currency in his Philadelphia shop. But he also saw how shaky it could be. In the 1720s, he wrote pamphlets arguing for paper money in Pennsylvania, not because he loved fiat, but because hard coin was scarce and trade needed a boost. He wasn’t naive, though—he warned against overprinting, knowing it could tank value and hurt the little guy.

Bitcoin’s fixed supply (21 million coins, no exceptions) would’ve caught his eye. Franklin hated inflation’s sneaky theft; he’d likely see Bitcoin’s hard cap as a middle finger to governments that debase currency for quick fixes. His pragmatic streak—he once said, “A penny saved is a penny earned”—aligns with a system that rewards saving over spending, unlike fiat’s endless churn.

Liberty Above All

Franklin’s life was a masterclass in sticking it to centralized control. He helped draft the Declaration of Independence, risking his neck to ditch a king’s rule. He’d have sniffed out fiat’s dirty secret: it’s a tool for power, letting governments tax through inflation and fund wars without consent. Bitcoin, with no central bank pulling strings, would’ve thrilled him. It’s money that doesn’t bow to a crown—or a central bank Federal Reserve.

Picture him at the Constitutional Convention, where he backed tying money to gold and silver to keep Congress honest. Bitcoin’s decentralized ethos fits that vibe: power to the people, not the state. He might’ve quipped, “Those who would give up sound money for convenience deserve neither liberty nor wealth.”

The Inventor’s Spark

Franklin wasn’t just a talker—he built stuff. Lightning rods, bifocals, the Franklin stove—he loved solutions that worked and he despised patterns. Bitcoin’s, open soure code, a clever mashup of cryptography and incentives, would’ve tickled his tinkerer’s brain. He’d probably have grabbed a quill (or a laptop) to figure out how it ticks, maybe even pitched improvements. Satoshi Nakamoto’s white paper? Franklin would’ve devoured it, scribbling notes in the margins.

He also loved efficiency. Colonial trade was a mess—slow ships, mismatched coins. Bitcoin’s borderless, instant transfers would’ve made his merchant heart sing. Imagine him writing in Poor Richard’s Almanack: “A coin sent swift o’er seas beats a galleon’s sail.”

And anonymity? Franklin, who hid behind pseudonyms like “Silence Dogood,” would’ve grinned at Bitcoin’s pseudonymous edge—perfect for dodging tyrants. But as a civic-minded guy, he’d warn against letting it shield lazy cheats over hardworking folks.

The Verdict: A Champion with Footnotes

So, would Franklin have adopted Bitcoin? Likely, yes—with gusto and a few caveats. He’d have seen it as a weapon for liberty, a check on greedy governments, and a damn clever invention. He might’ve rallied for it in a pamphlet, rallying cries like, “Sound money is the people’s fortress!” But he’d also nudge it toward stability and fairness, ever the practical patriot.

Picture him at a Philly tavern in 2025, Bitcoin wallet on his phone, toasting to a new revolution. “In this digital age,” he’d say, glass raised, “we hold the purse strings at last.” Franklin didn’t just dream of freedom—he built it. Bitcoin would’ve been right up his alley.