That is exactly what I have been thinking. It is not something that historically proven effective or not, we still don't know If we can distribute the defense force specially when you defend against centralized one. Which leads us to a rule that; either all parties of a single society honestly, trustfully and voluntarily come to a mutual consensus of discarding aggression or the power will move violently from one party to another except for the party who calls for peace.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I dont think this is what I was implying. Yes, it is not historically proven. But the majority of common sense people can defend against centralised attack. There are many examples of that. The historical problem always has been that via corruption new power structures did emerge and the peoples revolt against suppression turned into the next type of dictatorship.
This is why blockchain can add an important new part to the puzzle in organising completely without hierarchies and fully decentralised. These systems are much harder to compromise and may enable the common sense people to protect their liberties without the need to have any rulers guaranteeing them. Its rules without rulers and order without authority.
Hope one day we can attain this "Rules without rulers and order without authority". :)