Just had a thought. It's a long one so bear with me...

Public goods generally cannot be wholly controlled by a single private company. If people attempt to surrender control of the public good to a single private company attempting to enforce a monopoly on it, the public good will be neglected, other options will still remain on the market (and those able to understand this catastrophe and the existemce of alternatives will patronize them), and the private entity entrusted with sole control over the good will use the inadequacies of its own handiwork as a pretense to get more funding to attempt to "solve the crisis" that it either still believes it can solve or still tries to convince other fools that it can solve.

Government, as I hope is obvious, is the premier private entity whose whole business model is monopoly and promising more than it can achieve, and is predicated on exactly this dynamic.

A pet theory of mine about natural monopoly that I've been developing:

The information and feedback mechanisms necessary to properly manage a resource, if they cannot fit into one mind or one private decision making unit, indicate that the resource cannot be a natural monopoly.

A natural monopoly can only occur in matters such as an owner over its private property, where the economic actor who owns the monopoly has, exclusively, the complete information necessary to direct the resource (property) to its most economical/ethical/important uses. If there is such a thing as authority, this theoretical limit is the boundary of its exclusive domain.

A customer at the grocery store who buys an orange now has sole control of that orange, knows its location in his car and later at home, knows where the guns are in his house for defending his property, knows what he needs the orange for, etc. He knows very little about all the other oranges at the store, which are a different resource, and even less about all the oranges in existence, which the store does not have the knowledge to control either. It would be impossible for this store or this customer to control all oranges. Voting doesn't magically transfer the knowledge either. Each actor controls its resource, but the public good of oranges is not wholly controlled by anyone. #Bitcoin is the same exact way, a public good with a distrubuted and immutable ledger, incentive framework, and verification system that no single private entity controls. Property rights under nature work this way. It is the way the world is. We are actually living in anarchy right now, but most people, even anarchists are deluded into thinking we are not. The government is merely a criminal that results in tremendous opportunity costs versus the alternative of people acknowledging the truth of their limited understanding and that of other people.

This theory of property/natural monopoly usually works out to exactly the kind of private property delineations that libertarians define. Sole ownership of a resource is determined not only by deontological or pragmatic oughts, nor only by the norms that tend to develop in greater degrees of rationality and human capital, but also by the very nature of reality and the frontier of possibilities itself. It is an observation of the Natural Law, the way things actually work as a fact.

#Economics #Monopoly #KnowledgeProblem #PublicGoods #TragedyOfTheCommons #NaturalLaw #Property

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I feel like I should have made this into a longform blog post but I just had to get this out while I was thinking about it again.

Swiss democracy. It’s the best way to define common ownership, in my opinion :)

I should endeavor to study it more. I'm a market anarchist; the voluntary principle is super important to me, but as far as a corporation or a small jurisdiction deciding how to manage its functioning, I bet Swiss democracy has a lot to teach me. It's my understanding that they are the freeest nation state to live in in the world. That's definitely indicative of something that works!

Yeah, I have a website at https://thedemocracyupgrade.org that explains the most important from a libertarian perspective.

I think it’s the most voluntaryist system in the world. And like you said it’s the freest country in the world.

My argument is that it’s the referendum system.

I'll definitely check it out later. I love your name by the way, Citizen Locke haha! I came to anarchism by way of the classical liberal tradition (and just being raised with enlightenment values and innately loving freedom) and I consider myself still one very particular and exotic example of a classical liberal.

Thank you! :)

Yeah, I really like Classic Liberalism and Swiss Democracy.

I believe these philosophies are very basic definition of the West. But of course understand where everybody else is coming from.

Thank you for your thoughts! Just wrote this article about centralization vs decentralization: https://medium.com/@penglunds/centralisation-vs-decentralisation-forming-a-coherent-understanding-976d269ae491

Would love your thoughts. I don’t necessarily see the government/nation-state as in conflict with decentralization per definition as long as they’re not in control of money supply. In democracies, government is just a naturally arising central entity - just as a company in my opinion.

I like it! I would not have used the word "anarchy" as synonymous with "no rules", as I see anarchy as rules without rulers: exactly the kind of decentralization you are describing. Other than that I agree!

And I like the emphasis on how stable decentralized base layers or natural laws provide a foundation for centralized entities to flourish, without destroying the whole structure. I would also have added emphasis on how decentralized base layers are generally composed of many centralized entities operating in a way that keeps the overall foundation stable, due to incentives or those natural laws themselves, upholding the overall structure of this layer.

Governments are a naturally forming class of corporation indeed! but their design of disrespecting the volition of their customers and voting stakeholders, as well as huge swathd of the operations they engage in, even on sound money, are an inefficiency and destructive activity resulting from a lack of proper information flow and rational thinking, at least from my perspective. I imagine under Bitcoin, as you think, governments will still be around, but most will be more efficient, smaller, and more antifederalist, and, eventually in some regions, many will be transformed into voluntary associations, a la anarcho-capitalism.

That is, I think, the natural tendency in a society of mostly rational people with sound money as a foundation. Many many awesome centralized entities will form on these base layers of rules without rulers: libertarian law from legal services corporations and property and money safeguarded peacefully on Bitcoin.