PGP and Bitcoin were specifically created as responses to political environments. They're political tools by nature.

And the gun was created as a response to the political reality that it's hard to fire a bow.

There is nothing inherent in being a maker that gives said maker any special understanding or say over political aspects of the tools that maker creates.

And no one knows why Bitcoin was created. No one's sure who created it, and that person certainly hasn't provided any concrete motive. I don't know enough about PGP to say the same, but don't try to shoehorn a tool into your argument just because you don't think I'll notice.

I don't know, guns do seem pretty political in the US. The "gun lobby" is pretty influential; far more influential than tech.

If guns can have lobbies, surely PGP can as well.

It's an example, don't miss the forest for the trees.

I think it's a good example.

It's a good example of how you can make the usage of a tool a political issue, but the tool itself is agnostic to its use.

A tool does not care why it was created. A hammer won't refuse to bash in a skull because "that's not what it was built for".

The creator of Bitcoin was quite clear of his political motivations [1]:

[1] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg099...

As for PGP, Phil Zimmerman was even clearer in his intentions [2]:

[2] http://www.pgpi.org/doc/whypgp/en/

Technology is a response to politics as well as a catalyst for political change. To attempt to "de-politify" technology as a matter of course is like castrating a prize bull.

Death of the author. What a tool is made for is irrelevant to its use.