Can all Government Functions be Replaced by Peer to Peer?

[vleroybrown]

Speaking of federal or the consolidation of international governments. As they become more about money, guns, & shit it is more apparent to me that we must get them out of power!  

Government these days is only good at about 3 things. Amassing Money for itself and the partners in Crime which Empower it, Raising and Perfecting a death machine unparalleled in the history of man kind, and deciding who is right and wrong in a system of laws which increasingly is perverted by the first function.


Resistance is futile yet we can now get them out of all the business we make.. Accept Peer to Peer Commodity Backed Coins Only. "Every Dollar becomes a Petrodollar" Asking for a coffee bean? coffeecoin! etc.



No resales for USD!



Am I Wrong?

[1715202772]

1715202772

[1715202772]

1715202772

[Yakamoto]

I think that they could be replaced, but there would be some issues without a governing authority, such as child slavery, black markets, slavery in general, etc. In some ways, P2P government wouldn't be bad. However, thing like law enforcement would turn into bounty jobs, so there would be a sudden increase in either bounty hunters or mercenaries.

For other government functions, however, it could be good or bad. No president = anarchy, so you see what the issue becomes pretty quickly...

[bigtimespaghetti]

Yes government could of course be replaced by any number of voluntary systems.

Not in our lifetime though, in the West we are fast approaching the crunching point at  least in West Europe where either we approach tyranny or government contraction. Guess what the public, sorry informed voters choose in this situation?

The balance is in letting the tax cattle believe they are free enough so they keep producing to support the myriad parasite classes.

[bigtimespaghetti]

I think that they could be replaced, but there would be some issues without a governing authority, such as child slavery, black markets, slavery in general, etc. In some ways, P2P government wouldn't be bad. However, thing like law enforcement would turn into bounty jobs, so there would be a sudden increase in either bounty hunters or mercenaries.

For other government functions, however, it could be good or bad. No president = anarchy, so you see what the issue becomes pretty quickly...

Slavery is inefficient, at least in advanced economies. Slavery has many guises and is often typecast as cotton picking or pyramid building.

We have problems with trafficking and child issues now. Just because a coercive entity does not exist does not mean people will not band together against it.

[Daniel91]

I think that we should have self regulated society, where most things is decided by the free market and maybe government with very little functions like public health, foreign policy, monetary policy, army etc.

[Brewins]

How the military could be replaced by p2p?

[bigtimespaghetti]

How the military could be replaced by p2p?

Military are a construct of governments. What do we need defense against? You would likely pay a company within a certain jurisdiction, to guarantee, within reason your safety, a little classier than mercenaries and likely more efficient than a bloated standing army.

I boggles my mind to think of the amazing ways the free market could replace the role of government.

[bigtimespaghetti]

I think that we should have self regulated society, where most things is decided by the free market and maybe government with very little functions like public health, foreign policy, monetary policy, army etc.

Tried that a couple hundred years back... The Us has the largest government in the world now. So much for small government! ;-)

Plus your parameters are not free market? Health? Foreign policy?

[Brewins]

How the military could be replaced by p2p?

Military are a construct of governments. What do we need defense against?

Against other governments that think disagree about their minimal role and the military is a waste of money?

Can't see p2p and private armies winning against a centralized governmental army.

[vleroybrown]

How the military could be replaced by p2p?

Military are a construct of governments. What do we need defense against?

Against other governments that think disagree about their minimal role and the military is a waste of money?

Can't see p2p and private armies winning against a centralized governmental army.

You can't see it?  Ask the good people who don't have it!

[Tusk]

What Anarchy Isn't https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMoPBDz5ycA

Military is only required for governments to fight each other or their citizens do away with governments and you do away with war, the problem is a chicken and an egg how do you get rid of all governments. We have to gradually reduce them all. Make people more accountable and responsible for their actions, courts can still exist and security will be provided where necessary by the private sector. Euthereum and others are developing some interesting initiatives that will hopefully begin bringing this about.

[Yakamoto]

How the military could be replaced by p2p?

Military are a construct of governments. What do we need defense against? You would likely pay a company within a certain jurisdiction, to guarantee, within reason your safety, a little classier than mercenaries and likely more efficient than a bloated standing army.

I boggles my mind to think of the amazing ways the free market could replace the role of government.

On the topic of private militaries; Private Military Corporations? What about those that already exist, like G2S or Blackwater? What would happen to them?

But I agree 100%, the free market would be able to replace a lot of government roles.

[Omikifuse]

And what about basic research in the hard sciences?

All the world it is made mainly by the government, because it has no immediate applications and private corporations would lose their competitivity if they invest in basic research as much as the governments.

[vleroybrown]

How the military could be replaced by p2p?

Military are a construct of governments. What do we need defense against? You would likely pay a company within a certain jurisdiction, to guarantee, within reason your safety, a little classier than mercenaries and likely more efficient than a bloated standing army.

I boggles my mind to think of the amazing ways the free market could replace the role of government.

On the topic of private militaries; Private Military Corporations? What about those that already exist, like G2S or Blackwater? What would happen to them?

But I agree 100%, the free market would be able to replace a lot of government roles.

I've played with private contractors.  They drop ya w 2 shots and don't ask pls.. im not sure I can pay them the amount of money they need.  If you like killing people u should meet them.

[vleroybrown]

I think that we should have self regulated society, where most things is decided by the free market and maybe government with very little functions like public health, foreign policy, monetary policy, army etc.

I can see a regulations market from government in the capacity of insurance.. I'm not worried about any of that

[vleroybrown]

All 7 billion people in this world have the right to provide security with their value.  Inalienable right that human across the world share in a good respecting peoples

[hua_hui]

P2p govs sound good! But the p2p currency is not perfect yet. A lot of issues are coming out and wait to fix up. Still not applicable to other areas.

[thriftshopping]

No. It cannot.

National security cannot be done in a peer to peer fashion. If this were to be even attempted the US and the world would be doomed.

[shockinglyugly]

All 7 billion people in this world have the right to provide security with their value.  Inalienable right that human across the world share in a good respecting peoples

I would not go quite as far to say this is an Inalienable right.

[Mike Christ]

I think that they could be replaced, but there would be some issues without a governing authority, such as child slavery, black markets, slavery in general, etc. In some ways, P2P government wouldn't be bad. However, thing like law enforcement would turn into bounty jobs, so there would be a sudden increase in either bounty hunters or mercenaries.

For other government functions, however, it could be good or bad. No president = anarchy, so you see what the issue becomes pretty quickly...

Those are still issues with a governing authority; in fact, black markets are more popular than ever, there's several based on bitcoin going on right now.  In fact, black markets exist only because government attempts to force people to not buy certain items; without them, there would be no problem, all "shady" businesses come to the light and are far less dangerous that way.  Furthermore, slavery was only profitable because government socialized the cost of capturing slaves; when governments stopped doing this, slavery ended very quickly.  While slavery is still a problem in some areas, the fact that it's still a problem, despite all this government entering our lives, means that it's going to continue to be a problem with or without government.

Law enforcement is a government-created institution; in its place would be defense agencies which literally do serve and protect, unlike the ones we have now.  And it's false that no president = anarchy, it's no state = anarchy; you can still have a president in an anarchic system, you just wouldn't force him on people who don't want him as their president.  Consider the following video for more information on how it works:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muHg86Mys7I

No. It cannot.

National security cannot be done in a peer to peer fashion. If this were to be even attempted the US and the world would be doomed.

Nationalism is inefficient; you can have local security, and militias, and fancy defensive weaponry very easily if people would stop forcing others to live under one federal roof.  You can't defend a whole nation without the state, but it's because of the state that people are subjected to a nation in the first place.  Furthermore, there is nothing a terrorist or another nation would want with a non-nation; there's nothing to conquer, no government to influence with terror, and no infrastructure to take over if an invasion occurred: the only thing that makes empire profitable is the fact that empires exist at all.