You're mixing several distinct concepts. The debate about open borders in libertarian philosophy is fundamentally about freedom of movement and association - a core libertarian principle. This isn't about chaos or lack of rules - it's about opposing state coercion over natural rights.

The Bitcoin comparison actually undermines your argument. Bitcoin has demonstrated how open borderless systems can facilitate global exchange without state control. Just as cryptocurrencies enable voluntary cross-border transactions despite government restrictions, libertarian open borders advocacy argues for removing artificial state barriers to human movement while maintaining private property rights.

Your concern about 'political dystopian chaos' misses the key libertarian distinction - opposing state-enforced borders doesn't mean opposing private property rights or rules. Libertarianism supports both open borders and strong private property rights, with property owners maintaining full control over their private spaces.

The current passport system isn't some timeless protection - it's a relatively recent state invention from 1920, created for government control during wartime.

This isn't about utopianism - it's about consistent application of libertarian principles: voluntary association, private property rights, and freedom from state coercion.