Bitcoin is frequently misunderstood in this regard.
It's the most anarcho-capitalist system ever invented, WITHIN the network itself. Property rights are absolute, defined by Math.
But OUTSIDE of itself, Bitcoin is just another open-source project, which is effectively anarcho-communist. It's a collective of worker-volunteers who make decisions as a group.
Even if you can "own" a Bitcoin in a way you could never own anything before, Bitcoin itself is "owned" by no one. There's the paradox!
So, unless adoption had taken off, and there‘d be millions of nodes and miners, the project is extremely vulnerable. One could say, people didn’t get it, thus it failed?
Well yeah, there's a flywheel between the number of nodes, hashrate, (fiat) Price of BTC, and developer involvement... Once BTC made a few ~10x's of growth, that would have been sufficient to reward early developers and presumably keep them in the project.
Of course some will always "rage quit", and other new ones will join over time. But the scenario where this doesn't happen is exactly what has come to pass with a number of "altcoin" projects over the years, also forks on BTC like BCash and whatever Craig Wright's scam was.
