It is widely and falsely considered that, for a civilization to thrive it must have a Central Authority who rules and govern over a population. It is also not commonly known that this centralization creates unimaginable huge problems through corruption. This corruption always appears no mater how integer a central ruler pretends to be. It has been discovered in 70s and 80s that humans that gains power over others undergo an evil effect that they absolutely cannot control, it is called "the Lucifer" Effect. This psychological effect on a human brain always, without discrimination, occurs on those who gain a Central Authority and/or Law Enforcement power. For more on this topic you can check this Lucifer Effect website. You might argue that this "effect" have been chosen an unfortunate denomination but hey, we are not to judge this naming but it's true negative connotations upon humans.
We still do not understand exactly why this effect appears, still in my opinion, I believe that it can be related to the inner ego. Yeah it looks like our ego have a tendency to infallibility and it could be related to the power given upon us by masses or being taken from mases by force.
A central authority does not need individuals to be uncontrollable because otherwise, well, they cannot ruled, therefore it would be pointless for a central authority to exist. That's the reason why the Anarchy has been stigmatized since the conception in 16th century.
A Radical Decentralization does not need a central authority.
The idea behind this concept is great and you might argue that this sounds to be closely related to Direct Democracy, but the fact that there is a representative reinforce the Lucifer effect feeling upon the respective representative, therefore there is no freedom of choice in the end. This happens because the Representative can always, in any point in time turn evil and do what ever he believe is right even that turns out it is wrong for the population that voted him/her.
In a society that has a Direct Democracy all rules and law are voted by the people which they, the people, can also be manipulated through mass influencers. It has happened and still happens all the times. So what is the solution? Well, if we exclude the Central Authority, then we have an Anarchy, another form of Radical Decentralized system.
Do not get me wrong here, it is absolutely ok to not understand some sort of things, because it was very well orchestrated for millennia to stigmatize the principles of ANARCHY and the ANARCHIC WORLD.
Anarchy means by definition a decentralize system. A decentralized system means that there is NO CENTRAL AUTHORITY. No central authority means no central rulers. No central rulers means people’s freedom. People’s freedom means freedom of self determination, Self determination means that all the actions that a person can take, it will be determine by the judgment of his reality. This judgement is totally independent of outside influence. Outside influence can be affected by trust. In an anarchic world there is no trust, this means that no matter what kind of intentions an individual or a group of individuals might have, absolutely nobody will trust them to have good and fairly distributed intentions. If there is no trust means that there is no ruler to determine any actions. If there is no ruler means THERE IS NO NEED FOR A CENTRAL AUTHORITY!
Does the above definition resembles something to you? It is Radical Decentralization. In this regards, Bitcoin is, or rather was, a radical decentralized system. Now, in a society that has no central organization rules it does not mean that individuals cannot cooperate in a community ruled by self preservation, prosperity perspectives and cooperation.
Still not convinced? Take the Bitcoin’s block chain. Is it decentralized? Well kind of. Bitcoin is not a good example anymore (maybe Monero might be or some other proof of work cryptos with no CEO to decide the future of it’s project) but anyway, BTC is a fairly centralized by mining corporations/companies with large amount of wealth and also fairly decentralized trough mining nodes that keep in check a fair mining distribution. If mining has some degree of centralization it is also fairly decentralized because all those entities are not owned by a central authority. All the decisions that are made for the good of the blockchain are for the good of the blockchain itself and not for individuals or corporations. This is done because there is no corruption in the code. If you take the Blockstream’s Lightning Network, it is definitely centralized but, with a high degree in freedom of choice and cannot influence Bitcoin’s blockchain by manipulating the code. Blockstream can manipulate the Lightning Network code because, well it is centralized. Get my point so far? Adam Back saw this opportunity to profiteer from Bitcoin's blockchain by keeping the Blocks Transaction under 1 MB.
I would argue that Bitcoin was a radical decentralized system before the corporations and central banks got involved into this "infinite source of income" which is Bitcoin Network. All decisions in changing the blockchain's cryptographic protocol were solely taken by the miners and master nodes.
Now people might also argue that, hey look there is this code, it means there is a ruler, means there is a central authority involvement that I have been talking all along. Well... yes... and no. If small groups of individuals temper with the code to fit their own purposes then it is no Anarchy or a Radical Decentralization respectively, but if everyone that have some degree of cryptographic knowledge then the rule that govern the system it is Radical Decentralized or Anarchic. If a mathematical rule is universally unchangeable by being proven over and over again to give the same results it means that the code or a set of rules must be proven mathematically to always be right. In a Anarchic Society individuals makes mathematical calculations in their brains if a decision is right or wrong. Some mathematical calculation are wrong some are good but at the end after a long debate the good and wrong results will always appear in a 50/50 ratio. Who decides whose right or wrong? The correctly determined mathematical code itself, I would say, and not the developers (or people in general). This ratio can always fluctuate if people do not have the correct information about any issue regarding the code. But still, people will know what to chose if their decision is right or wrong for their own purposes and for the neighbor's purposes if they leave in a peaceful manner, which means everyone will come at the end to a global consensus, even if the neighbors didn't agree in the beginning. It sounds like direct democracy but it is not, this is Anarchy!
The stigma thrown upon anarchy, is total chaos, and I suspect that this is what many people are believing to be. That is a completely untrue and unfair definition. This untruthfulness has been indoctrinated, directly or indirectly, to every single individual since childhood throughout adulthood and there is no reason to get insulted or offended by not understanding it. This stigmatization was and still is done to instill fear in uncertainty.
Fear is the greatest advantage of every central authority because this way they can maintain power, until it collapses under it’s own ridiculous rules.
Central Authorities ALWAYS FAIL, there is a 100% chance of failure.
Nobody knows when this failure is it going to happen and no central authority wants their failure to happen on their watch, but remember this, always the wealthy individuals wants to benefit from the system created by central authorities because well the decision are not globally accepted or approved by individuals and small communities, therefore the system is making you a slave of it.
The perfect enslavement was the Fiat Currency but from 2023 onwards it will be the CBDC… but this will be another future topic…
So what do you guys think? Let me know down into the comment section.
Take care out there!
