A world where "property" is anonymous, is a world where there is no private property. Cypherpunks (not all anarchists, I dont even think cypherpunks are an-archist) are wrong thinking that possession of keys has anything to do with private property. They are not going to win for several reasons, but if they will, the would create a system closest to libertarian comunism than to capitalism. When you argue with a comunist about property, they can tell you one of those: a) they are fighting for PERSONAL property (not PRIVATE). Thats the usual stalinist way of thinking and when you study the nature of this, you can see that it is actually a concession from the state, who by exercising property rights will determine what you can acquire and what use u must give it. b) they want to forbide property, so there will be just possession. That s the typicall answer form a comunist libertarian. And it is what cypherpunks propose too. This is just imposible, you can remove ownership as much as you can make cows fly. You can only throw them off the cliff and keep them off the ground momentarily. Private property is about what you can build without distubing others, not what the state gives you. Private property is based on the legitimate acquisition of goods, is what you can produce, not what anyone can give you nor what you can possess. It is the ability of doing what you want with the thing, the right to use and abuse how you want it, not others. On the other hand, private property of intangibles is impossible. You can only appropriate scarce, tangible and rival things. The same way that what we call "intelectual property" is not a real property, and it is just, again, a right concession from the state to seek and chase others using it, utxos are not a property. You dont own the utxos, you just own a concession from the system to do a certain things with them. The system will determine what you can do with "your" utxos, not you. You just can decide what system lets you to decide. You can not destroy utxos, you cant do what you want if the system doesn t let you. When you own a scarce, tangible and rival thing you can do whatever, even destroy it. You can do what you want with it. Not in the case of intangibles. So we hear cypherpunks saying all this seductive words full of young rebellion we must think if they can keep the represantation of scarce, tangible and rival things in a intangible system when the intangible system don t follow the tangible rules. I honestly think they are fighting against the reality, not against the state. They are fighting to eliminate the private property, and individual liberty; not to guarantee them.