This is not wrong but it assumes that society is a fixed thing within a fixed geographical boundary.
However, there might be also nomadic elites and virtual elites, of whom Satoshi is or was the brightest. These elites do not directly compete with the old elites for the same space.
This means that for some time the old local elites might be satisfied with being in control of their local societies while the new elites are forming online.
Very true that elites sometimes take a portion of the populace with them and separate from the old ones. That's what happened with the American Revolution. But in almost all cases the old elites aren't too happy when this happens. I think that its definitely the case that the elites we have now. They may not compete for the same space, but they definitely compete for the same people.
reply
In the American Revolution both the old and the new elites were projecting their power onto the same thing (a piece of land) using the same method (fielding armies). The present conflict is more like replacing monarchy with democracy: the old elites are powerful because they command the army and the police, but the new elites are powerful because they are popular with the voters - and as the result the old elites are outclassed and crushed.
reply
Great point. What I meant to point out in my previous comment was that the new nomadic/virtual elites are competing with the old elites for people, not land. Our current leaders are definitely the type to try and get into everyone's business instead of leaving people alone. So you're correct in making that distinction.
reply