That is not obvious, necessarily true or even (in my view) likely to be true: it seems to me that you've managed to hide institutions and organisations away in the details of your peer-to-peer network.
When it comes down to it, everything in human society is a peer-to-peer network with some structure on top.
Your assumption seems to be that the nodes in a network will be of somehow comparable size and power.
Where do you get that idea from?
Colman:
Correct.
Our current conflicted and obscure legal and financial overlay or "structure" is the problem, and it is here that changes are not just necessary, but already taking place.
I see a decentralised and non-hierarchical network of networked partnership protocols coming about bottom up to gradually make the existing system redundant. But it's not a case of "either/or", rather of organic evolution. "Any economic unit can emit money. The serious problem is to get it accepted" Hyman Minsky
Is this just a reformulation of libertarianism then?
