I'm Building a Justice System That Doesn't Need the State

Get the project:

Voluntary Justice - Open source decentralized justice system

All my tools - Full collection of agents, skills, and plugins

I've been thinking about justice systems for years. Not in the abstract philosophical sense. In the operational sense. How do they actually work? What are the incentives? Where do they fail?

The more I looked, the worse it got.

State justice systems are monopolies. They have no competition. No accountability. No feedback mechanism that forces improvement. They're slow, expensive, politically captured, and they focus almost entirely on punishment while leaving victims with nothing.

You get robbed. The state catches the thief. The thief goes to prison at taxpayer expense. You're still out whatever was stolen. The system "worked" but you're no better off than before.

This is insane.

So I started building something different. I'm calling it Voluntary Justice.

The Core Problem

State justice treats law as a sacred function that only government can provide. This framing insulates the entire system from the feedback mechanisms that improve every other complex service humans rely on.

Think about it:

Markets improve because bad products lose customers. Restaurants improve because bad food kills revenue. Software improves because bugs drive users away. Competition creates accountability.

Justice systems have none of this. They're monopolies protected by the very force they claim to regulate.

The results are predictable:

Monopoly control over dispute resolution. You can't choose your court. You can't choose your laws. You get whatever the local jurisdiction decided, whether you agreed to it or not.

Political influence over enforcement priorities. What gets prosecuted depends on who's in power, what's popular, and what serves political interests. Equal protection is a myth.

Qualified immunity and zero liability. The enforcers can't be held accountable for most mistakes. Try suing a cop for wrongful arrest. Good luck.

High costs borne by people who didn't consent. You pay taxes to fund a system you never agreed to, whether it works for you or not.

Outcomes that punish offenders while leaving victims uncompensated. The state gets its pound of flesh. You get nothing.

This isn't justice. It's a protection racket with better branding.

The Alternative

Voluntary Justice is built on a simple premise:

Law does not require a monopoly. Enforcement does not require political authority. Justice does not require taxation.

Instead, justice can emerge from:

Voluntary contracts between parties
Competitive arbitration markets
Insurance-backed enforcement
Reputation and exclusion mechanisms
Restitution rather than punishment

This isn't theoretical. Fragments of this system already exist.

International commerce runs almost entirely on private arbitration. Companies choose their courts, their rules, their enforcement mechanisms. They do this because state courts are too slow, too expensive, and too unpredictable.

Insurance companies already enforce behavior through pricing and exclusion. Drive recklessly, your premiums go up. Keep claiming, you get dropped. Economic incentives work.

Reputation systems govern most online and economic interactions. eBay sellers, Airbnb hosts, Uber drivers. Bad actors get filtered out through ratings and reviews.

Voluntary Justice unifies these components into a coherent, auditable framework.

How It Works

The system has four primary actors:

1. Individuals and Organizations who voluntarily participate by signing contracts that specify which laws apply to their interactions.

2. Arbitration Providers who compete as courts. They publish their rules, their procedures, their track records. Good courts attract business. Bad courts lose it.

3. Insurance and Bond Providers who underwrite behavior and enforce rulings economically. If you violate a contract, your insurance pays the victim. If you keep violating, you become uninsurable.

4. Enforcement Providers who execute rulings within strict contractual limits. Unlike state police, they have no immunity and can be held liable for overreach.

A DAO governs protocol-level rules, registries, and slashing conditions. But it explicitly cannot create crimes, override private contracts, grant immunity, or compel participation.

Participation is opt-in. Exit is always possible.

Contract-Defined Law

In Voluntary Justice, law is not legislated by politicians. It is selected by participants.

When two parties want to interact, they choose:

A rule set that governs their interaction
An arbitration provider to handle disputes
An enforcement sequence if someone violates
A restitution schedule for making victims whole

These terms are embedded in contracts that are human-readable, machine-enforceable, and cryptographically anchored. Between consenting parties, this contract is the law.

This is how business already works. Companies include arbitration clauses in their contracts. They specify governing jurisdictions. They define remedies for breach.

Voluntary Justice extends this to all interactions and makes it transparent.

If "done" cannot be clearly described, the contract cannot be formed. Ambiguity is the enemy. Clarity is required.

Dispute Resolution

When a dispute arises, the process is deterministic and time-bounded:

A claim is filed referencing a specific contract
Evidence is submitted and timestamped
Both parties escrow funds or lock insurance commitments
The selected arbitration provider hears the case under published rules
A signed ruling is issued specifying liability and restitution

There are no indefinite delays. No procedural gamesmanship. No qualified immunity.

Courts compete on speed, cost, clarity, and accuracy. Poor performers lose users and revenue. Good performers build reputation and market share.

This is how markets are supposed to work. Justice should be no different.

Enforcement Without Police

This is where most people get stuck. "How do you enforce rulings without police?"

The answer: economics.

The enforcement hierarchy is:

Automatic escrow transfer. Funds locked at contract formation transfer automatically based on the ruling.
Insurance payout. If the losing party doesn't have escrowed funds, their insurance pays the victim directly.
Bond slashing. Participants stake bonds that get slashed for noncompliance.
Reputation downgrade. Violations are recorded publicly. Future counterparties can see your history.
Market exclusion. Repeated violators become uninsurable. Without insurance, no one will transact with you. You're effectively exiled from the economic system.
Physical enforcement. Only if explicitly authorized by contract, only within strict limits, only by providers who are themselves liable for abuse.

Insurance is the keystone. To participate in the system, you need coverage. Violations trigger payouts. Repeated violations raise premiums or result in dropped coverage.

Bad actors don't go to prison. They become economic pariahs. They can't transact, can't contract, can't participate. This is arguably worse than prison, and it costs taxpayers nothing.

Restitution Over Punishment

State justice focuses on punishment. Voluntary Justice focuses on making victims whole.

Instead of:

Incarcerating offenders at public expense
Leaving victims uncompensated

The system prioritizes:

Direct restitution to victims
Structured repayment plans
Long-term exclusion for noncompliance

Incarceration becomes a rare, contractually authorized last resort. Not a default policy.

Think about what this means. If someone steals from you, the goal isn't to put them in a cage. The goal is to get your stuff back, plus damages, plus assurance it won't happen again.

Punishment satisfies vengeance. Restitution satisfies justice.

Identity and Reputation

Participants operate through decentralized identities tied to cryptographic wallets. Each identity maintains a non-transferable reputation profile reflecting:

Disputes initiated and received
Compliance with rulings
Severity and frequency of violations
Insurance coverage history

Reputation directly affects access to contracts, insurance premiums, and available courts.

This replaces coercive enforcement with economic incentives and market exclusion. You don't need to threaten people with violence. You just need to make bad behavior expensive and visible.

The Governance Model

The DAO governs the protocol, not people.

Its responsibilities include:

Maintaining registries of courts, insurers, and enforcement providers
Enforcing staking and slashing rules
Approving protocol upgrades

The DAO explicitly cannot:

Create crimes
Override private contracts
Grant immunity
Compel participation

This is crucial. The moment governance can create crimes or compel participation, you've recreated the state. The entire point is to prevent that.

Incentive Alignment

The strength of Voluntary Justice lies in incentive alignment:

Courts earn trust or lose business
Insurers profit by minimizing harm
Enforcement providers are liable for abuse
Participants benefit from compliance
Victims receive restitution

Abuse becomes expensive instead of protected.

Compare this to state justice, where prosecutors are rewarded for convictions regardless of actual guilt, where police face no consequences for most misconduct, where judges are appointed through political processes that have nothing to do with competence.

Voluntary Justice doesn't assume people are good. It assumes people respond to incentives. And it aligns those incentives toward peaceful resolution.

The Risks

No system is perfect. Key risks include:

Collusion. Courts and insurers could collude to favor certain parties.

Sybil attacks. Bad actors could create multiple identities to escape reputation consequences.

Escalation. Some disputes might genuinely require physical enforcement.

These are mitigated through:

Capital requirements and staking (collusion becomes expensive)
Transparent procedures (corruption becomes visible)
Reputation weighting (new identities start with low trust)
Insurance underwriting (professionals assess risk)
Contractual limits on force (abuse creates liability)

Unlike monopoly systems, failures in Voluntary Justice are localized and correctable. A bad court loses business. A corrupt insurer gets exposed. The system learns and adapts.

State justice failures are systemic and protected. Bad prosecutors keep their jobs. Corrupt departments keep their funding. The system resists change.

Why Now

I've been watching the pieces come together for years.

Bitcoin provides programmable money that moves without permission. Smart contracts enable automated enforcement. Decentralized identity makes reputation portable. DAOs demonstrate governance without authority.

The infrastructure for Voluntary Justice exists. Someone just needs to assemble it.

That's what I'm building.

The initial focus is digital-first disputes. Small-value contracts. Manual onboarding of arbitration providers. JSON-based job specifications. Proof of concept.

High-value contracts, physical enforcement, and fully automated arbitration come later. You have to walk before you run.

The Point

Justice does not require a monopoly, a legislature, or a badge. It requires clear rules, credible enforcement, accountability, and aligned incentives.

Voluntary Justice reframes law as a competitive service, enforcement as an economic function, and justice as restitution rather than punishment.

By removing monopoly control and restoring choice, the system creates conditions where peaceful resolution is the default outcome rather than the exception.

This is not utopian. The components already exist. The question is not whether voluntary justice can work. It's whether we're willing to replace inherited assumptions with systems that actually function.

I'm betting yes.

The Voluntary Justice app is currently in development. If you're interested in competitive arbitration, insurance-backed enforcement, or decentralized governance, reach out.