# Some thoughts on the importance of geopolitical decentralization

> **N.B** geopolitical decentralization is very different from geographic decentralization. One can have nodes evenly distributed between the US and a bunch of EU countries and still be extremely centralized from a geopolitical point of view.

Looking at the [distribution of Ethereum nodes](https://etherscan.io/nodetracker), the situation, from a geopolitical point of view, is far from ideal. 40-50% are in the US (the exact % depends on which day of the week you look). And more than 75% are in the West (i.e. under the same geopolitical influence).

Lido's node distribution, although better, is still far from ideal. While, the NOM team does keep track of, and try to optimize for, both [geographic and jurisdictional diversity](https://research.lido.fi/t/lido-node-operator-validator-metrics/1431/23), Lido has slipped backwards with respect to metrics like the amount of stake in the US (25% in 2023 vs 10% in 2022). My take is that we need to be optimizing for a new metric. One which better represents this notion of geopolitical resilience.

The best way to measure this is an open question, but I think we should start by looking closely at the existing literature; [Sam Hart's thought experiment](https://twitter.com/hxrts/status/1732608596322505026), and [the answers contained within](https://twitter.com/AFDudley0/status/1732805409864343969) the thread, also offer a good starting point.

Not only is this notion of geopolitical decentralization crucial to the long term health and mission of Ethereum, I believe it will become an increasingly important differentiator for Lido going forward compared to US / European bound entities like Coinbase, Alluvial, or Kiln.

## Addendum: Decentralization of power must be global

Phil Daian’s [four fundamental truths](https://collective.flashbots.net/t/decentralized-crypto-needs-you-to-be-a-geographical-decentralization-maxi/1385) (which I firmly subscribe to) are:

1. The only decentralization that matters is decentralization of power.
2. Architectural or technical decentralization will arise if power is decentralized.
3. Therefore, it should be a goal of technical decentralization to serve and protect decentralization of power.
4. Decentralization of power must be global.

There are three main reasons why decentralization of power must be global. First and foremost, credible neutrality.

### Credible neutrality

A group which wishes to make its internal mechanisms credibly neutral to the world must adhere to outside-world notions of credible neutrality.

If this group is too focused on a single culture, this eventually leads to a form of (mono)cultural assimilation. If that culture is US centric, for example, this means things like USD hegemony and valuing money more than freedom.

Truly credible neutrality, from a global perspective, can only be achieved via a confluence of cultures.[^1]

[^1]: Or in Phil's words: Expecting a system that exists within the context of a single set of peoples' utility functions, to supercede the utility of just that set is an obvious fallacy. There is a lot of talk about neutrality in cryptocurrencies. But, in a system with a bias towards one region, how can you possibly claim to have any notion of neutrality? some notion of global fairness intuitively also seems important to defining "neutrality". One of our aspirational goals as a cryptocurrency community is surely to build systems that are fair for users. While, like with neutrality, we may disagree on exactly how this translates into a technical definition of fairness, we all have notions of unfairness that we know when we see them. A system that privileges certain geographies over others, in which simply inhabiting a space in the physical world provides outsized returns, surely cannot be claimed to be "fair".

### Jurisdictional resilience

Given the increasing uncertainty and pace of the world, it feels like the importance of jurisidictional dispersion is up only (at least for this decade).

Lawfare is a modern epidemic. The current tendency of governments to instrumentalize the administration of justice for purely political ends is destroying the rule of law from within. National security has become a catch all term that can be used to justify almost any ends. A such, relying on a fair interpretation of the law -- let alone a meaningful overlap between what is lawful and what is ethical -- is no longer a viable option, regardless of the jurisdiction in question.

### WWIII resistance

One of Ethereum’s superpowers, and key differentiator compared to Solana or Cosmos BFT chains, is its ability to self-heal after stalling (a direct consequence of its liveness guarantees). This emphasis on [dynamic availability](https://twitter.com/sreeramkannan/status/1530474727944228864) allows the base layer to be extremely resilient and to thrive even in a highly adversarial environment – [WWIII resistance](https://twitter.com/GaetanSemp/status/1657092705074176010) is in fact an [explicit design goal](https://twitter.com/TrustlessState/status/1068036713270788096).

For this to be practically true, and not just an idealistic fantasy, we need nodes to be far more evenly distributed across the world.