In this paper, we examine the discourses and ideologies that underpin trust in Bitcoin (BTC) as an algorithm-driven socio-technical system, raising critical questions about how trust is established and sustained in complex socio-technical assemblages. Through a Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) of three significant events in the cryptocurrency, we identify two interconnected, yet sometimes contradictory, ideologies enacted through four discourses that construct specific subject positions to produce and maintain trust in Bitcoin. The first, technical sovereignty, reflects adherence to notions of technical utopianism. The second, which we term peer-to-peer neoliberalism, frames BTC as a political experiment rooted in the individualization of responsibility and risk. Our paper contributes to the existing literature by arguing that algorithm-driven technologies like BTC neither establish trust solely through their apparent technical neutrality and security nor simply replace traditional institutional mechanisms of governance, control, and interaction. Instead, they are enacted through discourses and material arrangements that require continuous maintenance. This maintenance relies on power relations enabled by these ideologies yet remains contingent upon the ongoing reinforcement of the ideologies themselves—rendering trust inherently precarious and always at risk. This insight shifts the analytical focus from the dominant emphasis in the literature on technical features, social arrangements, and user perceptions to the underlying ideological frameworks that shape these elements, as such.

中文翻译：

---

在区块链中，我们信任：维持对比特币信任的意识形态和话语


在本文中，我们研究了支撑比特币 （BTC） 作为算法驱动的社会技术系统信任的话语和意识形态，提出了关于如何在复杂的社会技术组合中建立和维持信任的关键问题。通过对加密货币中的三个重大事件进行批判性话语分析 （CDA），我们确定了两种相互关联但有时相互矛盾的意识形态，这些意识形态通过四种话语构建了特定的主体立场，以产生和维持对比特币的信任。第一个是技术主权，反映了对技术乌托邦主义概念的坚持。第二种，我们称之为点对点新自由主义，将 BTC 视为一项植根于责任和风险个体化的政治实验。我们的论文对现有文献做出了贡献，认为像 BTC 这样的算法驱动技术既不能仅仅通过其明显的技术中立性和安全性来建立信任，也不能简单地取代传统的治理、控制和交互制度机制。相反，它们是通过需要持续维护的话语和物质安排来实施的。这种维护依赖于这些意识形态所促成的权力关系，但仍然取决于意识形态本身的持续强化——这使得信任本质上是不稳定的，并且总是处于危险之中。这种洞察力将分析重点从文献中对技术特征、社会安排和用户感知的主导强调转移到塑造这些元素的潜在意识形态框架上。