Foundations of Society & Blockchains

This past year has been predominantly a reexamination of my assumptions of the world, most of which I wasn’t fully conscious of (and still aren’t). I want to talk about economics, law, order & governance as these are incredibly exciting topics for me, but first I wish to talk about love as it’s impression is freshest on my soul. Of course my thoughts are malleable and subject to change, I hold no strong dispositions against new verifiable information.

Let me first say I believe there are fundamental biological differences in men and women, I accept that. I find social science studies, particularly ones furthered by gender research labs to be highly dubious, there tends to be no hard data or repeatable studies. Men & women are not fundamentally the same, we’re not “blank slates” which are to be programmed entirely by society. It’s been shown in the most egalitarian societies that offer equal opportunity - still even then, there are gendered biases to how they live their lives. I disagree with any movement forcing anyone into positions that they are largely not interested in.

Order & Law (in that order) are necessary to create a civilised society, we intentionally bound our monkey-selves to transcend ourselves, to be better monkey’s.

I was raised on chauvinistic ideals, I was raised and thought positively of serving society and gave concession to females. I had the idea that I would setup a family with a partner in life. Among many things 2 stand out the most in changing that;

1) No Fault divorce. This is an issue with Law. Combined with alimony this has turned into a disaster and ultimately ruins the notion of Family. I see my own father fall victim to this on more than one occasion, along with many other good men. As far as I can tell it ruins the economic incentive, at best it functions as a means of wealth transfer from men to women. Look at marriage objectively, it’s an incredibly risky and a terrible business decision. There is many details and facets to each side, it’s an exercise to the reader, but I see very few upsides for the male beyond the opportunity to procreate, the costs are certainly not worth it. The opposing argument to this is of romance, I put forward that romance cannot be achieved without a solid foundation, unless you are a fool.

2) Third-wave Feminism - What once started off as a good idea, has in my opinion overreached it’s bounds. It’s no longer about equality(never was). But I do love feminists as they have challenged alot of my thoughts and have exposed alot of how society functions. The biggest I now see is hypergamy, male disposability and that men have enslaved themselves with the need for female approval (in which the ultimate manifestation is in loving sex). Almost all men’s behaviours are driven by the need for female approval, what does a man look like who does not require this?

I am starting to see incredible inefficiencies everywhere in society and they are all dictated by the rules we set up, yet nobody is really fixing them, at best they are monkey patched which just leads to more inefficiencies, it looks like it’s too hard to change them.

I’m no longer convinced democracy is the best mode of governance. It seems to be hardest to implement and it leads to irrational decisions, weak leaders who focus more about their image than doing what’s best and appeals that focus on simpler things like pride in race, language, religion & culture. Democracy alone is not the solution, especially in developing countries. I used to think the problem is with representational democracies, that there was corruption (and there is) and that was the fault, I started to seek out other modes of governance.

My thoughts moved then toward Voluntarism, Libertarianism & Anarcho-Capitalism. The important common denominator in these of course is self-reliance rather than state-reliance, these ideas would scale much better because they operate locally. I also think the Nation-State was required because the high transaction costs in governance, with the Internet and modern technology, I no longer think the Nation-State in it’s current form is required.

However I’m also not convinced everyone is equal, certainly not in thought & education, and not in physical strength. That’s not really compatible with the ideals my line of thinking went with - it will just lead to more victimisation.

But what if you could create a system that encompasses all of these ideals? I think Blockchains & Smart Contracts - specifically Ethereum can come into play.

Ethereum is a distributed virtual machine with multi-user support and object oriented architecture out of the box. Like other blockchains it essentially acts as a database, but where transactions are both immutable and atomic.

The user accounts contain state and optionally arbitrary executable code. State means that each account object has its own memory allocated and can store the value of variables in it. Anything that can be represented as a number, can be stored in object memory.

What does this mean in terms of governance? Order.

Ethereum is a medium of order. We can then develop Smart Contracts to run ontop of it, what’s important is that by default, ANYONE can independently create policies and use them among friends. By default you support Anarchy and bring order to the extra-legal sector. This might sound terrifying to governments, but I think this is challenging.

Future governments must support this. It allows the 1-3% of the population intelligent enough to create the own world’s. What what of the rest of the 97% of the population? This is where good policy comes in, where network effects come in, where good governance come in.

We need a set of Smart Contracts which govern well, are liquid and stand on their own merits. They will become a liquid common law and will set new standards for our future society. They will allow us to make changes when necessary while providing the best framework for the masses.

There’s many more benefits to Ethereum such as instant global deployment, cheap transaction costs but most importantly (for me) we can create a dynamic foundation for Order & Law which can become more responsive to the macroeconomic trends policy-makers inadvertently create.