I appreciate you efforts to explain this, but I can't really see what's the difference between what the founding fathers did and what you're suggesting.

And if it worked in the way you explained it, I would expect it to come out with a set of rules similar if not identical to what they came out with, if it was to afford the maximum amount of freedom for the individual given the circumstances.i.e taking into account the likely presence of would be tyrants, gangsters, warlords, criminals etc.

I don't see how you make out that it would be decentralized. And if it was based on consensus it would of necessity be democratic in nature.

To my mind a Constitutional Republic with Direct Democracy similar to Switzerland (rather than a representative Democracy like in most Western countries)is probably the best solution to the Governance/Management problem.