The concept of decentralisation is not new and has been talked about for over a century with regards to decentralised government and providing regional/local power and decision making. It is a utopian state in politics that can quickly result in falling back to a state of centralised control. Alexis de Tocqueville, a French aristocrat and politician, wrote about the French Revolution in the mid-1800s, "a push towards decentralization...[but became,] in the end, an extension of centralization."
It is human nature to not trust people we feel we do not have a connection to and when a central government, sometimes miles away from us in another part of the country, make decisions regarding us then some will reject it. The worst of centralisation comes through the hard rule of tyrannical rulers and dictators.
In the world of technology, we talk about centralised vs. decentralised control over protocols and systems. So what are the problems with centralised control in technology?
A lot of good projects start out with centralised control however, in my view, the most important factor that may make centralisation problematic, is trust. Do you trust the centralised governing body to behave appropriately and apply justice? Will they keep the project going in the same direction? Will they always be trustworthy?
Some of the potential pitfalls are:
In the world of blockchain, many of these potential problems are overcome. No one entity controls the blockchain and the system can therefore grow and expand with new parties participating. The original parties can even cease all involvement (or cease to exist) and the blockchain will live a life of its own. Modern blockchains also have a mechanism for approving upgrades so that the system can continue developing and expanding over time. We remove the trust on the centralised body and we can feel liberated. A bit like the French Revolution?
First, it is often argued that the decisions take a long time to make in a decentralised system. This is probably true but is also true for any system that expands participation. For example, an all-out dictator in a centralised system can make quick decisions - in fact, he doesn’t care about anyone else's opinion because he thinks he is right. A democratic system overcomes this by allowing a wider group of people to participate in the decision-making process. In the extreme example, a national election or referendum can take months to plan and organise. Large participation in a centralised decision-making process will render it inefficient.
So a decentralised system will take a bit longer to make a decision based on the degree of democratic involvement from different parties in the decision-making process.
Secondly, and more importantly in my view, is that just like Tocqueville wrote about the French revolution, we are in danger of slipping back into centralisation. The utopian dream is not realised because, in the end, a few people in the community take all the power. In the world of blockchain, these are the whales. They often dominate for their own gratification and reward. They make all the decisions about the future of the system and if that happens, the system risks becoming an "extension of centralisation".
