I want to get some thoughts from the community about this perspective,
I have a simple structure looking at decentralized projects
Good government | Bad government
—————————————————-————————
For | |
—————————————————————————
Against | |
—————————————————————————-
For good government one can help with catching illegal behaviors, against good government include money laundry, gambling so on and forth
Against bad government is helping Venezuela escape its hyperinflation, we can put intentions in places we see fit.
And of course one can replace government with other centralized entities, governments are just easier for all to imagine
The tricky part is how is good and bad decided? What do you guys think?
You're right about a tricky part being the 'good/bad' distinction, so let's start with that. What's a good government? For me, a good government has the following characteristics:
1. It's acting based on justice (and justice is more or less in the sense that John Rawls had).
2. It protects human rights.
3. It's trying to make sure that the economics of the country is prosperous.
If you take these factors into account, I think a good government would support decentralization (since it allows more freedom and transparency of the processes), whereas the bad government would tend to be totalitarian and would thus be against decentralization. But that's a simplification, of course, and some might reasonably disagree with that.
