Corporations, like the state, are another kind of story we like to make, and by story I mean what Harari so often argues about.
morality before the church, trade before the state, exchange before money, social contracts before Hobbes, welfare before human rights, culture before Babylon, society before Greece, self-interest before Adam Smith, greed before capitalism ~ Matt Ridley
The state has its origins in the emergence of trade, which required some laws to be enforced to ensure proper game-theoretic interactions. My idea of what we need to become a decentralized state is to automate the law using artificial intelligence, because the law is just a collection of heuristics, and to make the processes secure using Blockchain.
I don’t want to be French or American or whatever, just human.
When you call yourself an Indian or a Muslim or a Christian or a European, or anything else, you are being violent. Do you see why it is violent? Because you are separating yourself from the rest of mankind. When you separate yourself by belief, by nationality, by tradition, it breeds violence. So a man who is seeking to understand violence does not belong to any country, to any religion, to any political party or partial system; he is concerned with the total understanding of mankind. ~ Jiddu Krishnamurti
But perhaps the idea of a decentralized state makes more sense when we are in space, as it will be much harder to hold the leash of centralization.
This may be part of a larger trend of “fragmentation”:
The disconnect can be profound; an American anime geek has more in common with a Japanese anime geek (who is of a different ethnicity, a different culture, a different religion, a different language…) than he does with an American involved in the evangelical Christian subculture. (...) The national identity fragments under the assault of burgeoning subcultures. At last, the critic beholds the natural endpoint of this process: the long nightmare of nationalism falls like a weight from the minds of the living, as the nation becomes some lines on a map, some laws you follow. No one particularly cares. The geek thinks, ’Meh: here, Canada, London, Japan, Singapore—as long as FedEx can reach me and there’s a good Internet connection, what’s the difference?
In a world of a geographically distributed mesh of subcultures, large chunks of the state’s responsibility can be handled by in decentralized ways. Everything from creating laws to adjudicating them can be handled by dispersed, asynchronous groups of strangers, essentially replacing whole swathes of existing bureaucracy with chains and contracts.
What I’m not sure about though is what happens with the state’s ability to enforce and police, ie. what happens when someone objects to a decision dictated by a blockchain? How do you deal with squatters or looters? Will we see the rise of decentralized security forces, something like “Police DAOs”?
Digested from https://brain.louis030195.com/Philosophy/Human+Society/The+centralized+state+is+obsolete
and cross-posted from Farnam Street community.
The centralized state is obsolete
#society
Edited 2021-12-09 − 08:03
Epistemic status
#schroedinger-uncertain
The centralized state is obsolete
If we have decentralized companies, why not decentralized state altogether?
Corporations, like the state, are another kind of story we like to make, and by story I mean what Harari so often argues about.
The state has its origins in the emergence of trade, which required some laws to be enforced to ensure proper game-theoretic interactions. My idea of what we need to become a decentralized state is to automate the law using artificial intelligence, because the law is just a collection of heuristics, and to make the processes secure using Blockchain.
I don’t want to be French or American or whatever, just human.
But perhaps the idea of a decentralized state makes more sense when we are in space, as it will be much harder to hold the leash of centralization.
This may be part of a larger trend of “fragmentation”:
Source: https://www.gwern.net/The-Melancholy-of-Subculture-Society
In a world of a geographically distributed mesh of subcultures, large chunks of the state’s responsibility can be handled by in decentralized ways. Everything from creating laws to adjudicating them can be handled by dispersed, asynchronous groups of strangers, essentially replacing whole swathes of existing bureaucracy with chains and contracts.
What I’m not sure about though is what happens with the state’s ability to enforce and police, ie. what happens when someone objects to a decision dictated by a blockchain? How do you deal with squatters or looters? Will we see the rise of decentralized security forces, something like “Police DAOs”?