Unfortunately the free market cares about crypto->cryptocurrency more than about crypto->cryptography.

We are all, unfortunately, under control of an entity that values financial growth at all costs over any sort of scientific merit.

Can we use that to garner public support for cryptography under the banner of digital currency / cryptocoins?

Something like this:

The five eyes are trying to ban crypto! The government wants to be able to access your life savings when it inevitably all goes digital!

Eh I wouldn’t be so quick to blame finance for this one. How quickly did we lose the “hackers vs crackers” debate in security? Even this forum, plenty of people think the “hacker” in the name refers to cybercriminals because the name was so throughly co-opted.

Internet fun-bucks

"magic internet money"

Magic beans that live in your computer, or, uh, digital Chuck E. Cheese tokens. On a side note did you know the E. stands for Entertainment? Entertainment is literally that mouse’s middle name.

Isn't all fiat money magic in that way?

Nope. Fiat money is created as debt repayable only in that currency, and backed by a government which levies taxes only in that currency, so future demand to obtain the currency doesn't depend entirely on the assumption its purchasing power will go up. Even then, it needs a lot of intervention to keep it stable on a day to day basis.

But aren't cryptocurrencies technically a subset of cryptography ?

Yes but it is a very broad subset to the point that it isn't useful. It's like saying that a law makes Germany a "money heaven" after introducing mobile payments.

Would you call your phone 'material science'?

Not really, but I would definitely call it electronics

eGold would have been a great name (limited supply, prone to gold rushes, comparable to cash, ...). Sadly that name is taken