Bitcoin, in a world where it is the sole currency, has the benefits you quoted.
If Bitcoin doesn't work in the real world, that's a problem of Bitcoin.
> Bitcoin, in a world where it is the sole currency, has the benefits you quoted.
If Bitcoin doesn't offer sufficient benefits in the real world as it is without being the sole currency in the world, there's no plausible route to it becoming the sole currency.
“My clever idea is great if everyone wakes up one day and abandons all other alternatives for it, but not otherwise” is a long winded way of saying “my idea sucks”.
Adoption/revolution.
Kind of like how nations compete and in the process to drag everyone else down: Like US and China trade war.
The current financial system faces such battle-ordeals and isn't immune, remember the Black Wednesday.
Doesn't it? What changes if you take out the fiat intermediary and buy energy (a fungible, near-universal production input and end-consumer product in one) directly and the competition is about a commodity that is not a currency?
The theory of Bitcoin was basically "money without people". You wouldn't have to worry about governments and politics; value would be sent and stored in pure pieces of math. Mere governments couldn't possibly do as well as the glorious algorithms wisely fixed in advance by, etc, etc.
But if you're right, Bitcoin has way more politics than a third-world kleptocracy. And it clearly lacks the institutions and formal procedures used to shape those kinds of political currents into useful effects on the currency and the economy.