I've been wrestling with this quality in a technical sense for quite some time.
Take for instance IP. IP was designed to be decentralized. And "End to End Arguments in System Design" piled on and led to UDP, further disintermediating sysadmins and their kernels. And we all felt that energy when we discovered the Internet, that magic hope of building new systems that served ourselves with voluntary peer to peer interactions.
But all of this was a bit fallacious, in that there is nothing forcing parties to follow a protocol's guidelines, rather than taking things "as they are" and acting in their own self interest. "I"SPs have deployed DPI gear and transparent proxying, GeoIP providers have forced some implicit notion of location onto every IP address, piracy surveillance firms legally harass people running small routers, etc. Ultimately there was nothing built into the protocol that would prevent these things happening and so they did, despite that boundless world we felt when it was fresh.
Think of how difficult these attacks would have been if most packet fields had been protected with encryption and addresses were based on source routing (onion, of course). Obviously that would have necessitated different technique requirements, and perhaps failed in different ways, but you can see what I'm getting at. There are modern overlay networks that do these things, but since their users are a minority of all users, it is easy to block them outright.
FWIW I see the same thing with Bitcoin and its lack of the untraceability property. How long until the financial control industry ("money laundering") invents a parallel source of truth, and progressively gets it enforced at the exchanges?