In establishing Decred and its potential value to us as individuals and society, we many times must examine and contemplate the root philosophies behind what drives the beliefs behind its protocol. Doing so helps ground us in our foundational convictions and persuades us to continue to push for further integration of the Decred protocol, so that we may see its potential come to fruition.

Lets delve into this notion by leading off in a root philosphy that merges one of John Locke’s ideologies as integrated into modern POW systems and protocols. We can aptly call it “Labor Theory of Digital Property”.

The purpose of the merger is to explain/establish sovereign right of the individual over his/her digital properties in relation to POW or hybrid cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, Decred, Monero, Ethereum and the like.

Drawing on the philosophy of labor theory of ownership, or the first principle of appropriation, in which the natural law holds that property that has come about from the exertion of labor or energy upon natural resources, one has ownership right of that property.

Parallel this to a digital world and economy therein, and one deducts that the exertion of labor/energy upon digital resources, in these terms “blocks” on blockchain protocols,would give ownership rights over the assets found within to the laborer(miner) in appropriate measure.

Locke asks in “Second Treatise on Government” by what right an individual can claim to own part of the world, when in terms natural law says the world belongs to all? In likewise terms, how can an individual claim to own part of our own digital world?

The answer lies in that persons own themselves and thus the labor or energy therein, even if exerted by ones own personal property (i.e. CPUs , mining rigs, etc.).

When a person works, the labor enters a resource. When a persons property or CPU exerts energy, energy captures that digital resource. Thus the digital resource becomes property of that person by his labor or his CPUs energy exerted.

POW becomes POL (Proof of Labor) or in digital terms POEE(Proof of Energy Exerted) .

Natural digital law would apply that the POEE that has come to an agreement between a CPU and a digital block would give ownership of the resources found in that block to the CPU or group of CPUs that extract it via energy.

And thus the person who owns the digital resource has full right of that resource, to do with as he/she would deem appropriate.

And lastly enters the theorized concept of a digital free market, an appropriate free digital economy whereabouts individuals may transfer ownership of digital properties to others , whereas there is agreement to transfer the resource, its value, and proprietorship to another.

For this to occur , natural free market law would coincide digitally to where outside intervention of authoritarian entities would prohibit the natural digital rights of the proprietors or the market they operate in.

In all this, it is the digital property rights that must remain intact, be upheld, with no wavering in integrity or application of the natural laws therein.

Property Rights Through Creative Anarchy

Why establish the preceding rational thesis? Because the sovereign future we head into will demand it, specifically with SOV mediums such as Decred, which will continue to come into our possession via mining and staking.

The current digital net we reside in , while masked with an modern day ‘open source’ persona, is one that actually is upheld by feudalistic nature. Nothing of individual nature that seems to make its way on to the internet these days actually seems to belong to individual.

Not data.

Not profiles.

Not content.

Not APIs.

If not all these, then certainly not the concept of ‘digital property’ as it relates to digital currencies.

It is my belief that this will change in the coming decades. The free market will demand it. Should legislation attempt to rein the free market, the free market will forcefully find a way to integrate it. With this integration, we must always be mindful that all government policies and programs are made by design to pit citizen vs citizen. This is merely distraction. The defining problematic root is never white vs black, rich vs poor, nor man vs woman, but rather the individual vs the State. And many times over, “the State” and large conglomerates favor the idea of owning your property, or at least the power you can wield with it.

History has taught us this. It has occured with land, with gold , and taxation of fiat. As stated before, the individualistic nature that once seemed to reside on the internet has been replaced with feudalistic mediums to weaken digital property. This overreach was one of the defining premiums that gave developers the inititial inspiration to create such sovereign vehicles such as Bitcoin and Decred.

It is a harsh truth to have to admit, but we currently live in a modern society where any action to procure or secure individual property, specifically when it comes against interests of deciding Powers, is viewed by most Stateheads as a form of anarchy.

In their simplest theorized forms, cold wallets , privacy implementations, and seed phrase passwords are all just that — tools of anarchy to empower individuals in their sovereign endeavors to establish power in self as opposed to power in State.

Digital property, that of SOV mediums, whether mined or staked, are in their most minute forms tools of creative anarchy to establish more functional systems and methods of operation. These methods are vital for humanity , as it is what inspires us to evolve. To look at the purity of creative anarchy in establishing digital property, all one needs do is look at the impressionable words of two spearheads of self sovereignty, Mises and May.

“All human progress always happened in a manner that a small minority began to deviate from the ideas and habits of the majority, until finally their example inspired the others to take over the new way.” — Ludwig von Mises

“A specter is haunting the modern world, the specter of crypto anarchy. Computer technology is on the verge of providing the ability for individuals and groups to communicate and interact with each other in a totally anonymous manner. Two persons may exchange messages, conduct business, and negotiate electronic contracts without ever knowing the True Name, or legal identity, of the other. Interactions over networks will be untraceable, via extensive re- routing of encrypted packets and tamper-proof boxes which implement cryptographic protocols with nearly perfect assurance against any tampering. Reputations will be of central importance, far more important in dealings than even the credit ratings of today. These developments will alter completely the nature of government regulation, the ability to tax and control economic interactions, the ability to keep information secret, and will even alter the nature of trust and reputation.

The technology for this revolution–and it surely will be both a social and economic revolution–has existed in theory for the past decade. The methods are based upon public-key encryption, zero-knowledge interactive proof systems, and various software protocols for interaction, authentication, and verification. The focus has until now been on academic conferences in Europe and the U.S., conferences monitored closely by the National Security Agency. But only recently have computer networks and personal computers attained sufficient speed to make the ideas practically realizable. And the next ten years will bring enough additional speed to make the ideas economically feasible and essentially unstoppable. High-speed networks, ISDN, tamper-proof boxes, smart cards, satellites, Ku-band transmitters, multi-MIPS personal computers, and encryption chips now under development will be some of the enabling technologies.

The State will of course try to slow or halt the spread of this technology, citing national security concerns, use of the technology by drug dealers and tax evaders, and fears of societal disintegration. Many of these concerns will be valid; crypto anarchy will allow national secrets to be trade freely and will allow illicit and stolen materials to be traded. An anonymous computerized market will even make possible abhorrent markets for assassinations and extortion. Various criminal and foreign elements will be active users of CryptoNet. But this will not halt the spread of crypto anarchy.

Just as the technology of printing altered and reduced the power of medieval guilds and the social power structure, so too will cryptologic methods fundamentally alter the nature of corporations and of government interference in economic transactions. Combined with emerging information markets, crypto anarchy will create a liquid market for any and all material which can be put into words and pictures. And just as a seemingly minor invention like barbed wire made possible the fencing-off of vast ranches and farms, thus altering forever the concepts of land and property rights in the frontier West, so too will the seemingly minor discovery out of an arcane branch of mathematics come to be the wire clippers which dismantle the barbed wire around intellectual property.

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!” — Timothy C. May

Decred’s potential lies in being one of the very blades that helps society cut the barbed wire.

Disclaimer: The preceding is not intended as investment advice but rather blockchain philosophy and monetary theory.

This article is open source, uncopyrighted, free to use for public domain as anyone may see fit. Attribution, although appreciated, is not required