The Proposition#
Even if the geographical name, culture, language, and historical memory of "Japan" remain a hundred years from now, there is no rational reason why the exact combination of rules, currency, qualifications, administrative divisions, public services, and political participation currently monopolized by the Japanese state must survive intact.
Similarly, even if the geographical name and regional culture of "Chiba Prefecture" endure, the administrative unit that currently exercises unified control over the prefectural office, assembly, ordinances, licensing, and subsidy distribution will not necessarily retain the same authority a century from now.
The Universal Government's long-term hypothesis is not a prophecy that the names of states and municipalities will vanish.
The functions monopolized by territorial states will gradually be unbundled into technology, markets, voluntary communities, mutual aid, and open protocols. The state and municipalities will shrink from being the sole rulers to merely being one of multiple system providers.
Why a "Hundred-Year Hypothesis" Instead of "Inevitability"?#
The state will not naturally disappear simply because it is inefficient. Through taxation, law enforcement, vested interests, the fear of crises, custom, and national sentiment, even inefficient systems can survive for a very long time. Even as science and technology advance, if they are weaponized for surveillance, taxation, control, and war, the state's grip could paradoxically strengthen.
Therefore, the future will not automatically transition to a Universal Government.
What the Universal Government asserts is a vector: the more the following conditions are met, the more rational the unbundling of state functions becomes, rendering legacy territorial bulk-governance overly expensive.
- The identity, history, capabilities, and contracts of an individual can be verified across borders.
- Value storage and settlement can be achieved outside state currencies.
- AI and software drastically reduce the costs of administrative work, screening, verification, and translation.
- Education, qualifications, insurance, and dispute resolution can be chosen from multiple providers.
- The costs, effects, and failures of systems can be compared using open data.
- Individuals can exit or switch services and communities without changing their physical residence.
The Society We Aim For#
Science and Technology at the Core#
Policies must not be justified by authority, titles, or tradition. Objectives, hypotheses, costs, metrics, falsification conditions, and expiration dates must be made public and updated based on results. However, "science" will not become a new command word; the value judgments of what constitutes a "good outcome" and the distributive question of "who bears the cost" must also be disclosed.
Free Transactions#
Voluntary exchange between adults is recognized as a fundamental principle. Regulations will be strictly limited to the minimum necessary to prevent concrete harm to others, fraud, coercion, severe information asymmetry, and negative externalities. Market entry barriers designed to protect existing businesses, and monopoly regulations that solely benefit legacy license holders, are prime candidates for abolition.
Minimal Regulation#
The burden of proof lies on those who propose a new regulation to demonstrate its necessity. All regulations must come with a purpose, cost, expiration date, review date, and conditions for abolition. Regulations that lack a comparison against a non-regulated scenario, whose effects cannot be measured, and which have no expiration date will generally not be permitted to survive.
The Destruction of Bullshit Jobs#
We will reduce paperwork created solely for the sake of paperwork, screenings maintained to justify the existence of screening bodies, projects launched just to capture subsidies, and meetings held to prove an organization's relevance.
Our target of destruction is not human beings, but the systems that forcibly sustain work that creates no value. The talent and resources freed by abolishing unnecessary tasks must be allowed to flow into learning, creation, caregiving, research, entrepreneurship, and frontline services of the individual's choosing. Prolonging the life of vested interests will not be labeled "employment policy."
Rewarding Optimal Strategies#
The rewards should not go to those who excel at connecting with bureaucrats, lobbying politicians, or elegantly drafting subsidy applications.
- Create value for which others voluntarily pay.
- Deliver better results with fewer resources.
- Admit failures quickly and update strategies.
- Accumulate trust and track records in a verifiable format.
- Refuse to disguise harm pushed onto others as personal profit.
We will build a system that rewards individuals and organizations that choose these strategies. Profit through political connection, socialization of losses, blocking market entry, and concealing information will be treated not as optimal strategies, but as system exploits to be patched.
Survival and fundamental human rights will not be prizes in this competition. The ultimate metric for the minimum safety net is not the survival of the supporting organizations, but the actual improvement in the lives of the individuals they serve.
How to Break the Subsidy Dependency Structure#
Subsidies are not inherently evil. For research and development, disaster response, and infectious disease control—activities where the market alone struggles to recoup costs—subsidies can be entirely rational.
What the Universal Government will destroy is the following structure:
- Continuing year after year with ambiguous goals.
- Counting the amount spent and the number of accepted applications as "results."
- Allowing recipients and the governing agency to monopolize the evaluation of the system.
- Refusing to terminate ineffective programs citing employment or stakeholder protection.
- Favoring existing organizations accustomed to the application process over new entrants.
- Privatizing profits to the recipients while socializing the costs of failure to taxpayers.
Every public funding project must be equipped with a clear purpose, beneficiaries, total costs, alternatives, counterfactuals, third-party evaluations, and termination conditions. Projects that cannot demonstrate results will be scaled down or terminated, shifting the power of choice and funding away from those who protect the system to the individuals forced to use it.
The Hundred-Year Transition Plan#
Phase One: Making the State Measurable#
Make budgets, regulations, licensing, subsidies, and policy effects machine-readable. Attach responsible parties, revision histories, deadlines, and abolition conditions to every system.
Phase Two: Creating Alternative Paths for State Functions#
Experiment within the bounds of current law with non-state settlements, private qualifications, proof of outcomes, selectable education/insurance/authentication, and online dispute resolution. Do not immediately abolish state services; instead, build comparable competitors.
Phase Three: Separating Residence from System Enrollment#
End the paradigm where physical residence entirely dictates education, welfare, qualifications, cultural belonging, and political participation. While "Chiba Prefecture" may endure as a geographical location and cultural sphere, it will cease to be the exclusive system provider.
Phase Four: Shrinking the State to a Compatibility Layer#
Retain only those functions that are extremely difficult to handle without collective action: violence prevention, minimum rights guarantees, and the bridging of disparate systems. The Japanese state will no longer be a community of shared destiny demanding loyalty, but a compatibility layer for connecting multiple overlapping communities and systems.
Failure Conditions of This Hypothesis#
The Universal Government does not treat the future as a religion. If the following situations persist, the hundred-year hypothesis will be revised:
- Unbundled private systems become more monopolistic and opaque than the state.
- Exit options become an exclusive privilege of the wealthy.
- Non-state currencies and qualifications fail to beat public systems in stability, trust, and fraud prevention.
- The harms of surveillance and power concentration outweigh the efficiencies gained by technology.
- The functional unbundling reduces the practical choices available to the vulnerable.
In such cases, we will change the technology, the systems, and the speed of transition. We will never say "It is correct simply because it is the Universal Government." The Universal Government itself must be subject to verification, exposed to competition, and ready to be exited if it fails.
Conclusion#
There is no need to overthrow Japan by force. We only need to systematically reduce the functions that strictly require the Japanese state to execute.
There is no need to erase Chiba Prefecture. We only need to separate living in Chiba Prefecture from being forcibly bulk-enrolled into the systems of the Chiba Prefectural Government.
The most powerful way to dismantle a state is to actually operate a mechanism that is freer, cheaper, more transparent, and easier to exit than the state itself.
The revolution of the Universal Government is not an occupation; it is an alternative.