Sure... this article is more conclusion than argument. I had a hard time understanding your counter argument, but I can say this: The concept that fraud and trust are expensive to manage in a non-violent environment, and that it is possible to render both fraud and trust obsolete comes from what I have learned so far designing incentive architectures for decentralized autonomous organizations on Ethereum. Ethereum is a technology that allows commerce to take place in such a way that violence is essentially impossible, trust is obsolete, and allows rules to be established that make fraud always unprofitable. It is the many hours spent considering how competition will advance in the upcoming future for this voluntarist setting that gives me insight into the post above.

If the topic interests you, I currently have an in progress draft of the guidelines to rendering fraud, trust and violence obsolete using sovereign software. In the near future I will be releasing the finished version. If you enjoy it, feel free to add suggestions or comments on how to make it easier to understand and read. The intended audience is people designing decentralized autonomous organizations. (only I can see your comments) https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Oghfq1VFfGvScxzNWD14vNg_fEAC8HVrfVVVU3Al-gA/edit?usp=sharing