If you are convinced that one needs a king in order to make food, then we will always need a king (in more modern forms of presidents, parliaments, or whatever aristocratic structure). Because we will never be free of material needs and always be prone to physical violence.
Wow. What you smoking?
If you believe that one day we will be free of material needs and will not be prone to violence, then I think the guy smoking heavily is on the other side of the line
I still need a house, I still need food, I still need a lot of material stuff, and I can still be beaten up, tortured, and killed. I don't think that this kind of thing will disappear in any near future, on the contrary.
Again you continue to conflate large scale with small scale. The key concepts you elided from your thought process were:
As the physical economy becomes a smaller and smaller portion of the total economy, we can move away from physical violence as necessary for human progress.
Instead of harvesting high diversity of effort (i.e. true investment) with a viral distribution model, IMO Byteball is creating a low entropy speculation with too much top-down control at the nascent stage where it needs exponential distribution. Thus the probability of failure is much higher, i.e. the antifragility is very low.
And the various ways I have tried to explain to you that annealing by decentralized failure is more antifragile than top-down failure. So thus when violence is only at an individual decentralized level, then it can't fail everywhere all at once. It anneals (please search the thread for my use of the word 'anneal'), as in simulated annealing as a form of free market fitness (which is why ice doesn't crack if you freeze it slowly enough).
So the point is that once the intangible Knowledge Age economy is orders-of-magnitude more valuable to humanity than the tangible one, then top-down control over the tangible one won't be economic. The top-down controller wouldn't be able to extract enough value from it to maintain control over those who extract value from the intangible economic.
And that my friend is a "genius" level divergent analysis. We can't train a machine to think this way, because it is induced from creative thinking originating from my unique experiences and integration in the human living network.
I hope you clearly see your error now.