Thanks for elaborating! Yes, and these private armies will then establish spheres of influence, and proceed with taxation in their spheres of influence where they will have monopoly on violence.
We’ve been there, it’s called feudalism.
Discussion
why would they hold a monopoly on violence? they would make manufacturing of weapons worldwide illegal?
No of course. Just because they’d be stronger within their domain. A peasant in the Middle Ages could stab a knight with a pitchfork, the other knights would come after him, kill him, rape his wife, and sell his kids.
That’s how it always plays out when you have armed groups of people around. Someone always ends up holding the monopoly on violence within some area/domain.
spheres of influence were a product of technological limitations...now with global travel trade and citizen held money any small number of citizens can hire a militia to "challenge the sphere of influence"
Bitcoin brings back freedom to markets which means no monopoly on a market on violence. Anyone can buy violence so the costs to incurring violence on others is risky because they can also hire violence to strike back.
Why do you assume that anyone will be rich enough to buy enough violence? Bitcoin is not free in the monetary sense. Someone will always have more money than someone else, even if all money is Bitcoin. And then, obviously, people who have more money will be able to buy more violence than other people.
And then other people will have to pay the ones who have enough money to buy enough violence for ‘protection’.
And that’s taxation.