Death tote

Jim Bell once asked the question: “There is so much freedom on the Internet, how can we use all this in real life?” And he came up with an organization that is most convenient to compare with a sweepstakes. An ordinary sweepstakes works like this: it collects money from all participants and pays those who correctly guessed the result.

Jim Bell's "tote" is arranged a little differently: here the subject of guessing is the date of death of a person, and all participants are divided into three groups. There are "donors" - these are those who are dissatisfied with someone. There is an "object" - this is the one with whom the "donors" are dissatisfied. And there is a "predictor" - this is the one who predicts the date of death of the "object". "Totalizator" collects money from "donors" and pays them to that "predictor" who correctly guessed the date of death of the "object".

Unclear? Then in order. First, let's discuss the roles of the participants in more detail.

Here, let's say, a man in the street sits at home and watches the news, and an overfed, arrogant and arrogant member of the party of crooks and thieves is broadcasting from the screen. And the layman understands that no democracy will help to remove this reptile from the feeder. What is our hero doing? He anonymously deposits a certain amount (no matter how much it is a pity - at least a dollar, at least a thousand) to a special account, thereby becoming a "donor". All those who do not like this particular politician send money to the same account. "Tote" summarizes the funds received and publishes information about the amount of money collected for the exact prediction of the date of death of a particular "object". It turns out such a kind of unpopularity rating. Let's say, $100,000 was collected for an accurate prediction of the date of death of politician A, and $800,000 for politician B. This is as far as "donors" are concerned. Let me emphasize once again that all “donors” are anonymous.(Bitcoins are an anonymous currency, and the "Tote" can be kept in TOR or freenet. - M.S.)

Now imagine a professional (or not so) killer. He sits at home and studies the rating of unpopularity. For someone more money was filed, but he also has serious security. And for someone less money, but it's easier to get to him. In the end, a compromise is found, and the killer becomes a "predictor". He plans to eliminate the “object”, then makes a prediction, which he encrypts (this moment is very important: the “Totalizer” cannot read the text of the prediction) and, together with a certain amount of money, sends it to the “Tote” address. And here is the money? The fact is that if the amount of the premium for a correct prediction is significant, and the object is elderly, there is a possibility that someone could try to guess blindly: they would simply bet on all days for several years. To do so was economically inefficient, and there was a requirement to accompany the prediction with a certain amount. In practice, this amount could be, say, one thousandth of the amount of the premium.

If such a system works, and the old system of states cannot oppose it with something equally revolutionary, then after a certain time of existence of such a totalizator, literally all public politicians will perish. And there will be no new ones: it will be clear to everyone that the appearance on the TV screen means guaranteed death. There will be no politicians, no government, no taxes.

There will be no army. But if there is no army, then someone will immediately seize such a country? Do not hurry. Historical experience shows that peoples do not bring their enmity to the point of general war. Wars are arranged by rulers. The clearest example of this is the situation with the German people after the Second World War and with the peoples of the Eastern Bloc after the fall of the Berlin Wall: as soon as the rulers disappeared, the conflict disappeared with them. So why not just “order” the ruler of a warring country today? The answer to this question is obvious: only another ruler can make such a decision today. And the first thing he thinks about is: “What if they “order” me?!” In the case when the “customer” is society, just like that, with little bloodshed, planetary catastrophes like the First and Second World Wars will be prevented.

There will be no police. But if there is no police, then there will be an orgy of crime! Again no. Instead of the police, another, much more reliable and incorruptible mechanism of public self-regulation will appear. The fact is that, in addition to officials, the lion's share of crimes is committed by two categories of criminals - drug addicts who need to get money for drugs at any cost, and professional criminals. It is known, for example, that almost all cars are stolen by the same people. With drug addicts, it's quite simple: if there is no government, then there will be no prohibition on drugs, and the problem will move from a social to a medical one. Drug addicts will become what alcoholics are today. Only the average life expectancy of drug addicts, as we know, is many times less. As soon as the prohibition on drugs disappears, this business will cease to be super-profitable.

And pharmaceutical corporations, with vast experience in the field of drugs, will quickly fill the market with very cheap and high-quality products. Heroin will cost as much as aspirin. Drug addiction as a social phenomenon will be put an end to very quickly. It's just that all drug addicts will self-destruct. There will be no one to attract new ones. There will be no super profits, no drug lords, no law enforcement mafia, which is vitally interested in having drugs forever.

Even more interesting with professional criminals. The insurance companies will deal with them. It's just that they will finance really effective services for identifying criminals, and the identified villains will immediately be "ordered" in the manner described above.

Excerpt from assassination politics by Jim Bell Translated by Evgeny Bogorad in my small edition.