Decentralisation - Now You're On Your Own.
The world I live in is one where the direction of societal progress is fueled and driven by deception, bluff and double bluff.
In such a world, where propaganda and psychological warfare are staples of our society and where every aspect of our lives must be considered in a critical fashion, I would suggest it would be a wise and prudent move to question the seemingly organic momentum that appears to be building around the soon to be decentralised system of the future, as well as asking why it is gaining such momentum at such a pivotal time.
Decentralisation seems to be the buzzword of the moment, at least among small, select groups such as the one we all find ourselves in as part of the steemit community. It's a word I've used repeatedly myself when writing about freedom and personal responsibility.
Many of us, I would suggest, support the ideals of decentralisation because we take the word to mean no more government and no more central banks, which are two things I'm sure we can all agree we're better off without but what else comes with these positives? What are the negatives? What exactly is it that we're all celebrating and supporting?
What is decentralisation?
A quick google search will reveal the dictionary definition of the word to be 'the transfer of power from central government to local government' but when you disregard the obvious propandisation of the definition and extrapolate out the decentralisation of power, to my mind, you ultimately end up with power in the hands of the individual.
In an ideal world, a decentralised system might well be the way to go, if everyone were in fact able to take care of and provide for themselves and their families but for various reasons that's not the world we find ourselves in at the moment, so should we wake tomorrow to find that the centralised system we all despise so much has collapsed, we would indeed find ourselves with the decentralised system we desire but perhaps not the one we had envisaged.
If we did in fact wake up tomorrow to a decentralised world it would become apparent very quickly that not everyone will be as prepared or enthused about the situation as you might be. If there was no more central authority to police the streets or to pay the salaries of medical staff then who would do these jobs or provide these services in the new chaotic world where responsibility exists only to yourself and yours? Who will provide all of the services that we have come to rely on in our daily lives and without which society would descend into chaos?
Should the decentralised future of tomorrow be ushered in by a sudden crash in the centralised system, we would be left with a state of anarchy, as most would understand the word. Society as we know it would descend into chaos and each man and woman would be left to fend for themselves with no such safety nets available as we've become accustomed to within the centralised system. We'd be on our own.
The optimist in me believes this would allow us the opportunity to throw off the shackles of oppression that have been holding us back and forge a new future for ourselves that we can all be proud to be a part of but the realist in me recognises that people don't change quite so quickly and that this is not just hopeful but fanciful.
If we woke up tomorrow to a decentralised world, it would be dog eat dog. Survival of the fittest, which might be OK if you're a big dog or really fit but what about those of us who aren't, which is most of us? How will we survive in a future where we don't have the skills or where there are only a limited number of jobs? What part do we play in the future of tomorrow?
A dis-organised transition into a decentralised world could be a messy business . Perhaps it won't be as sudden a shift as I'm suggesting but rather a peaceful transition from one system to the next but if so, how is this achieved if there's no central authority to organise such a transition?
Make no mistake, decentralisation is a system like any other and those who have control over the centralised system will also have control over this one as well, unless we ensure otherwise.
Any system in and of itself is benign. Whether it be a governmental system, a dictatorship, a monarchy, an anarchistic system or any other you might wish to propose, the system is only a reflection of those who are managing or mismanaging it. So before we throw the baby out with the bath water, I would suggest that maybe we should take a closer look at why we're turning our backs on the devil we know in favour of the one we don't.
I live in the UK, where at the moment the National Health Service is quite clearly and obviously being deliberately mismanaged. This has been the case for a number of years now and the intention is to create such an adverse reaction to the services that are being provided under public management that it will allow those who are responsible for the mismanagement in the first place to offer the solution they always intended, which will ultimately be the privatisation of all health services across the country.
I offer this example because I'm suggesting that the same situation might be playing out in the decentralisation agenda. As I mentioned earlier, systems are inherently neutral and can be used positively or negatively, so maybe we don't need a new system after all. Maybe the one we have now can be fixed.
Why is centralisation such a problem anyway? The main problem with the system of today isn't that it's not fit for purpose but rather that we have time and time again allowed it to be controlled, corrupted and contaminated by the most sinister and selfish elements of our society.. If we took as much time to remove these elements and use the system positively, then maybe a change of system isn't required. The system is of course designed to suit their purposes but as with any system or any other thing in life, it can be used for positive or for negative, so the system itself is not the problem, only how we're allowing it to be used.
The centralised system our society is enduring at the moment has many, many problems that need to be addressed but can these problems be fixed by turning our back on the old devil system in favour of a new one?
Maybe we're better off with the devil we know.
What we have at the moment isn't actually that bad when you take the time to look at it yourself, rather than allowing propaganda to influence your conclusions. A system where everyone has the ability to freely choose who represents them might actually work if it wasn't corrupted by the fact that money and exposure are needed to be elected or if it wasn't for the fact that when those who do have the money and connections do get elected, they misuse and abuse the power granted to them to supposedly protect the public in order to enrich themselves and their friends by accepting bribes of all description from corporations, countries, banks and private individuals which all lead to negative consequences for the public they have been entrusted to protect..
A system where everyone has the freedom to choose whether they pay taxes or not might actually work if it was actually a voluntary system as described and if the taxes were being used for positive reasons that improve our society and communities rather than being used to fund wars and other such negative activities.
A one world government and currency might actually be the best way for humanity to go despite all of the evidence to the contrary.
As a young man growing up I always thought that a world where we were all united was something positive that we should strive towards and also hoped this would be something that I'd see in my lifetime because I innocently believed that the world and society were making constant progress in the right direction. But that was before I found out that the society we live in is no more than a controlled system of slavery. When I discovered this my thinking changed and the idea of the whole world being under one central control system became very much less attractive to me, if it was going to lead to a world of slavery. I thought I'd been conditioned to want such a world which was why I turned my back on it.
But what if all the 'New World Order' programming and conditioning has been a bluff all along designed to make us drop our guard when a new saviour system comes along?
As I said at the beginning of the post, I live in a world of deception and though it's not something I'm pleased about, I now view pretty much everything in life with a certain level of suspicion. Many of you will understand what I'm talking about when I say I'm suspicious of the water we drink or the food we eat, the air we breathe or many other such things but my suspicions run deeper than this and I feel that there's been a lot of social engineering at play in relation to this supposed organic transition to freedom by way of decentralisation.
I suspect we have been and are being conditioned to believe that there are plans for a one world, centralised, authoritarian regime that will enslave humanity once and for all but only as a means of concealing the true agenda or as a means to facilitate a seemingly organic revolution from those who believe they are fighting for freedom and liberty but who may in actual fact be bringing about the solution that the enemies of freedom desired all along.
These enemies of freedom are the most cunning and devious elements of our society and they have sustained their power over us across generations by deceptive tactics and propaganda. Every area of our lives is contaminated with this deception in some way. All the world really is a stage, with the chosen script being performed throughout the generations and while we feel now that we have the chance to change the script and write a new one of our own with a happy ending for all, we should perhaps take the time to guard against the possibility that the end might come with a twist.
The power our enemies have over us comes not from their physical strength, their wealth, their intellect or the system in which they operate. It's derived from their ability to work together towards a common goal, that being to enrich their lives at the expense of others and they do this by keeping the rest of us divided. Their unity is their strength and our division is our weakness. The system is irrelevant.
In order to evolve past this era of slavery we must surely come together, not move apart. So why do we feel such a need to turn our backs on unity in favour of individualism and self?
The timing of everything also seems very convenient to me given that we're moving into a new age where technology will be ever more present in our lives and where there won't be the same need or demand for human labour. This world isn't very far away at all.
What will happen in a future where technology is able to provide all of the things that those with wealth desire, where there's minimal requirement for human labour and where there's no social responsibility or mechanism to help those who need it? How will all of those who can't find work because there is none get the money they need to pay for the food they need to feed their families?
About 90% of the worlds wealth at the moment is held by a relatively small number of men and women and I have no doubt that this will also be the case in any decentralised future. The difference between now and then is that at the moment we have systems in place that ensure the rest of us are able to survive and are looked after when we're sick etc but in a world where there are no such mechanisms in place the majority of us would be left with little access to anything at all.
What if the centralised sytem we've been living under was only designed to last so long and always intended to fail? Surely those who designed it in the first place knew of their own plans and had their next move planned out in advance. What if the centralised system has served its purpose, to perhaps facilitate the progress needed by the elite in certain areas in order to reach a point where they no longer need us? What if all of the institutions that have been created over the decades and centuries to get us to this point have only been so to protect those at the top of society in order that they can achieve their goals and what if they have achieved them? What if there's no longer any need to put on the act?
What does a decentralised future look like anyway? Have you given it enough thought? Who do you trust with your money in this new decentralised world? Decentralised exchanges? What if they decide to fuck off with everyone's money? Maybe you should keep your digital wallet on you at all times. RFID chip anyone?
In a fast approaching, trans-humanist, artificially intelligent future with little requirement for physical human labour, it might be a good time for those who have the power and will to do so to separate the wheat from the chaff. Maybe it's time to start getting that number down to the desired 500 million, in balance with nature. You might think this a bit conspiratorial and out there to suggest that a 'controlled' reduction in numbers might be on the cards but you need only look back to the last century when you will see that those who sit at the top of our society are quite happy and willing to allow the rest of us to perish if it suits their own plans.
In truth, I have no idea what a decentralised society would look like or become but the thought makes me nervous because what I do know is that even if it is the organic, benevolent, spontaneous movement towards freedom that it would appear to be, at least on the surface, then there will be those who will attempt to capitalise from this newly found anarchistic sentiment.
If you need an example of a benign system that was supposedly created with the best of intentions but ended up becoming an anarcho-capatalists wet dream, then you need look no further than the very platform that you're reading this post on.
The centralised system could be viewed as one where we are a whole whereas the decentralised system could be looked at as being a collection of individuals. I would suggest that somewhere in the middle is where we should be aiming for. A system that ensures each and every one of us maintains our individuality and freedom but where we are able to all come together using co-operation rather than control as a means of progress.
To me, changing the system only really equates to changing the subject. I think we need to fix the problems that are inherent in any and all systems.
That's us.
True, all systems are neutral. The problem is that their designers, implementers and users are not. Decentralization’s greatest appeal, in my opinion, is that it reduces – not eliminates - the threat one human or a small group of human beings can pose to others.
If we were capable of ensuring that selfish people couldn’t aspire to leadership, that only those who can’t be corrupted become leaders, then, yes, centralization would be the better alternative. Resources would then almost certainly be harnessed and utilized more efficiently for the good of everybody and the environment in a country.
However, this is impossible for us to do. We’re humans. We are full of frailties. Colossal greed, petty jealousy, unreasonable prejudice, intractable ego and pride determine our thoughts and actions.
Yes, decentralization does give these weaknesses space to flourish but that isn’t reason alone to choose centralization as the better option.
The other thing that decentralization does is that it allows and gives people the freedom to talk, to question and to experiment. It allows them to make informed choices. Anyone who has ever lived in a place where the state controlled whom you talked to, where you went, whether you could go to school or not, where you lived… truly appreciates the value of these unalienable rights. The loss of these freedoms is what makes incarceration such a harrowing experience for almost all inmates.
Decentralization on Steemit et al is also leading to another organic kind of centralization. People with similar interests from all over the world are finding each other and forming communities that would never have seen the light of day otherwise. Writers are congregating @Writers’ Block. Software developers are pushing the envelope @Utopia. Innovators are gathering @sndbox. I’ve also come across an initiative called “We are hope” which has donated food and other items to other people from different parts of the world. These communities are, simply, inspiring.
They also show that the best human qualities can bloom when people are allowed to make their own choices.
I do agree, though, some kind of middle may be necessary to shield us from our worst tendencies.
Thanks so much for such an awesome comment @bhop42moro. You've been able to express your thoughts very clearly and simply which I struggled to do myself when making the post and I agree with you also on all of the points you've made in relation to it. I do see all of the positive initiatives that are being born as a result of the decentralisation process and these are to be celebrated but I worry that, as has more often than not been the case, the positives are being celebrated at the expense of looking at the negatives and detemrmining whether there is value in the new system as a whole or whether there are certain vulnerabilities within it.
As I understand it, the blockchain is supposed to be permanent and immutable, which at the moment may be true and something that's seen by most as a good thing for some reason but even if this is the case, we know that we are ingenious in our problem solving skills and have technology that can exceed our own abilities, so how long before some of us have the ability to change, edit or amend the blockchain to our own ends?
Just some mixed up thoughts, my friend. Thanks a lot for your time and your own thoughts.
Have a great day! :)
Thanks @tonyr, for the kind words.
Your opinion came out clearly in the post. I, too, struggle with writing, with finding the right words and as a consequence I write very slowly.
There is a lot corruption because many people not just think, they know that they can get away with greed. And they know this because records can be corrupted or made to disappear. Sometimes records are not even kept. If permanent ledgers could exist for more things especially in the public sphere, perhaps corruption could decrease. I doubt that it can be eliminated, though. Man is who he is.
That’s the same reason why I have no doubt that some people somewhere are already working hard to find ways to circumvent blockchain’s greatest strength – that all transactions are recorded for good, at least for now. No sooner will that happen than others will think of ways to protect it or come up with something more secure than blockchain. People like challenges and no sooner do they hear that something is the best, the biggest, the strongest than they go out of their way to prove it is not. Right or wrong rarely matter. And so it continues.
We are the greatest threat to any system we come up with, yes. Technology’s greatest strength and weakness is man. And yes, the reason why ‘progress’ should be approached carefully.
Often taking a risk is the only way to learn. Hindsight never comes before a fall.
How true, good point.
SDG
Sorry, I'm still new to the world of decentralization and cryptocurrency and all related stuffs so I may not have much to say but from what I garner from your post permit me to make a few points:
Firstly, the inherent problem is man himself. As @bhop42moro rightly put--we are full of frailties. The biggest problem is not the system itself but man's selfish nature. Unlearning these vices and relearning the virtues should be the first step. Empathy should be the word.
Secondly, I picked up this saying from somewhere and it has stuck with me since then: ...virtue lies in the middle. There's a need to examine both the centralized and decentralized systems and find the middle ground. A place where all or at least a great majority of the people's welfare are well catered for. A place where you can indeed be free to make your choices and have no fear of whether you would survive or not.
Thanks for this post. It makes one think.
Quite the long post @tonyr, and I’m going to have to look at it again and hopefully come back and give some feedback that might solidify not only your thinking but mine as well. I’ve been doing a lot of thinking on decentralization, the individual and the collective and I’ve got a lot more thinking to do on them.
I basically posited this question to my pastor just this last Friday. The discussion is ongoing.... to be continued....
Following
SDG
There are a lot of different points here, so it's a bit difficult to reply.
First of all, today I recommended steemit to a group of artists, but one of replies was that they disliked that everything will always stay on the blockchain and that account cannot be deactivated. This was on facebook, which I doubt doesn't do the same but keep the info to themselves.
Secondly, people need to realize that they don't have to understand everything about crypto to get started with a trusted friend or family member. I'm actually one of those people, totally enjoying steemit and the community and have someone else take care of rest. I learn a bit along the way, but I have other things to worry about. A new type of accountants would maybe make crypto more accessible to everyone. However, people who don't understand even the basic cyber security would be at a huge risk of losing everything. So those people simply cannot afford to invest in crypto.
We are lucky that there are some countries willing to experiment with new systems like minimum salary for everyone and different working hours. However, even with positive results, other countries are too slow to follow.
Lastly I agree that everything can be corrupted, because search for profit. The most effective might be to change the mentality of the next generations through better education and to share information with anyone else interested. To teach empathy for other living beings at any age.
Hey Kristy. Thanks for the great comment my friend. It's good to hear from you. :)
I agree with the last part of your comment especially and think we should teach our children and ourselves how to live differently, with qualities such as empathy and compassion celebrated more within our society rather than self perpetuation. We should be teaching our children how to work together instead of compete against one another.
Thanks again for stopping by and taking the time to read my post. Sorry it was a little bit long. :(
Hope you are well. :)
Don't worry, not too long. Just a feedback for the next time so more people read and reply :D