Cast by aviationdoctor.eth
Network states can’t have a police force, because that’s a prerogative of physical sovereignty. So, their power must come from something other than physical violence (or the threat thereof). Traditionally, that alternate source of power has been cultural hegemony: the hijacking of beliefs, norms, values, and mores for the benefit of the rulers, at the expense of diversity and freedom of thought. An onchain purity pledge is just a manifestation of that.
9 replies
gotta self-police, bottom-up style. top-down policing (of any variety) won't work and brews confusion, doubt, and eventually resentement/ resentment. my mental model is simply: 'internet cult' 💅🏽
And we already had the tools to self-police: at the platform level, an algo that buries unpopular content (though we’d still need a marketplace of algos to mitigate bias); at the channel level, mod rules; and at the individual level, the mute and block actions. We definitely didn’t need a top-down purity pledge, we just needed more refining of these tools. The new owner trying to unilaterally reshape the norms from the top is exactly the kind of cultural hegemony that I’m despairing over
There are those things, there are also the algorithms and the smart contracts. These are where the rules hit the network. The interface of human belief and the instantiation of the rules is where the networks will grow or die. Then, how they interact with IRL systems, which are maybe not possible to escape.
I assumed that since part of the network state is to achieve a grouping of minds rather than land, then later in that life of the group was to obtain physical sovereignty which can be pooled together to service the network state so I did some magic math in my head and assumed that’s how a network state gets a police force.
I think that’s the part that remains unproven. Previous attempts have either operated in no-man’s lands (e.g. international waters) or have leased a piece of land — and many have been kicked out or at least have caused some local discontent. Maybe space is the final frontier for the most techno-optimist NS believers, I’m not sure. But if you consider communities that aren’t physically instantiated — such as religions — then cultural hegemony (the rewriting of the beliefs and norms to the benefit of the ruling class) is how power sustains itself. Here’s a good example:
surely network school has a physical way to enforce rules? i don't see how any physical place could avoid this and remain intact
Sure, they can have bouncers, but nothing more. They’re still subject to the sovereign laws of their national host, whether Malaysia or Kazakhstan. My cast was referring to network states, though, not the school, in the sense that they are largely confined to virtual communities (you can’t exactly just lawfully declare physical sovereignty in 2026). Farcaster was one such community, but it was VC-funded and thus inevitably went for sale to the highest bidder, and now that highest bidder is acting like a cultural hegemon, erasing and rewriting the norms of that community
And maybe, there should not be a single source of power. Physical, political, economic, cultural, or even code, need checks and balances. Having only one of them leads to totalitarianism.
This is silly, the cartels are network states, Islam is a network state, the Knights Templar was a network state, the Hanseatic League was a network state You develop a police force and a legal system because people choose your jurisdiction over accessible alternatives
Where are you going in the fediverse? Or sticking around to be a hub of rebel alliance energies? And yeah I hear you. Fetishizing Singapore is definitely a shibboleth of sorts
I’m staying around, just using alt clients and the forked chain once ready
