pull down to refresh
159 sats \ 4 replies \ @lonestarr 10 Nov 2023 \ parent \ on: Balaji Srinivasan’s “Network States” bitcoin
I agree. In 1933 people could not conceive of a "state" that spans geographic regions. Like minded people will self sort, as we've seen in places like Texas and Florida, but I don't think chopping up geographies is a requirement, as long as property rights can be protected across a network state's realm. The financial infra is being setup to help protect people's claims to Bitcoin with Federated Chaumian Mints which turns multisig, privacy and UX to 11.
Physical properties, like land, house, car etc are all protected by UCC (the universal contract law). We don't need any gov or constitution to "protect" our properties.
reply
I want to believe this. Bad people will always try to steal, and bad people will always exist. If not bad, just desperate. Instead of government I'm thinking a decentralized monopoly of violence in order to protect property rights, because they will always need protecting. Basically, own a gun and know how to use it.
reply
That doesn't mean you need a gov to that for you.
The myth of authority
Here is a very good debate touching this aspect
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ircn5bJfTEU
reply
Never said you did
reply