As a matter of fact, word of balance is bullshit, it is just utopia. We can make analogy through monopoly board game, the game rule, same start line, all throw dice, who the most diligent, clever and lucky will be winner, the player didn't realize that the monopoli board has been manipulated before we play. Ordinary player focus on collecting aset, elit focus on owning special square like water, electricity, bank.
Why, because in this world 97% world population is only part of the system which build by 3% population in the top of pyramid. They don't need to have all the worth something in this world but they ensure can controlling through system they build especially, dominating and rulling important strategic knot such as infrastruktur, standarization, finance, supplychain distribution and legal frame work across the nation.
Almost impossible find exit way or fully separated from their system, what we can do is minimalize their monopoly by creating community economy. Community economy can be establish when population on the bottom of pyramid consolidated to make economy spinning horizontally on the bottom of pyramid and minimalize money rotating vertically from bottom of pyramid to the on top population. the main problem now, population on the bottom of pyramid not consolidateded so top of pyramid always suck wealthy from middle and lower class. We have sources but we don't have control on our resources. We have sources but elit ensure we can not enjoy it.
For decentralize system can be an alternatif to reduce our interaction with existing system. We can not demolish existing monopoly board but we can play on other smaller monopoly board which we call decentralization.
Yeah the monopoly board's rigged. Always has been. The dice are loaded and the bank is run by the same people that own the properties. Every time people try to build something outside the main system it either gets absorbed or destroyed. Community currencies get regulated out of existence. Mutual aid networks are labeled tax evading. Worker coops can't compete with companies which externalize all their costs on society. The system has antibodies. It's to kill the alternatives before they get too big to matter. Decentralization might be different because it's harder to kill something that doesn't have a head. But they're already figuring out how to regulate it, to tax it, to control the on ramps, the off ramps. The chokepoints just move. They don't disappear.
~
The world has always been the same, there are rich and there are poor. Officially, there isn't slavery today but modern days are no different from old slavery. When there was slavery, slaves were working to survive. Aren't there many people working today to survive too? In the past, the owner had to pay for your health and give you an accomodation. Today, we have mandatory health insurance and we pay for that. Basically, with a minimum salary, you get the money to eat, sleep, work and repeat. The mandatory insurance also helps when you are ill. It's not really different from old days. In the past, when slave did something great like killing an important enemy in the battlefield or being an extraordinarily brave, they were rewarded by kings and were moved in a higher class. Today, if you have a talent in football, basketball and other high-paying sports, you move from poor class to rich class. The basics are and has always been the same, rich own and poor rent.
By the way, what do you mean when you say that decentralization is something you can actually own? How does decentralization help in rent? In general, it mas many benefits but I can't see a benefit in terms of owning something. Decentralization means that there is no centralized power but it doesn't mean ownership over rent.
You're not wrong about the structure remaining the same. The difference between old slavery and wage labor is not that one is. The difference is that today's systems are better at concealing it. A slave knew they were a slave. They could see the chains.
However, in the old system, yeah, a slave could become a freedman if he or she did something extraordinary. But the system itself didn't change. The king was still the king. The structure stayed intact. Same thing today. LeBron James getting rich don't change the fact that most people are one medical emergency away from financial collapse. Individual mobility is not the same as systemic change
So when you ask what decentralization has to do with ownership versus rent here's what I mean: Right now, if you want to do anything in the economy you need permission. You need a bank account (they can freeze your account). You need to use rails of payment controlled by Visa or Mastercard (they can deny you). You need to have platforms on which to sell (they can ban you). Every single point of access is controlled by someone who can take it away.
Decentralization (when you do it properly) means you have the keys. Literally. Nobody can take your wallet. Nobody can prevent a transaction from happening. Nobody can deplatform you from the network.
Does that alter the entire system? No. Does it provide people with an instrument that does not require permission from the landlord class? Yeah.
