Review of Founding vs Inheriting from Balaji Srinivasan on 1729.com

On his excellent website/project 1729.com Balaji Srinivasan, there is an article today that goes over the long history of founding vs inheriting viewed from multiple angles: inheriting wealth (financial), inheriting a name (tradition), and inheriting an institution (responsibility). It is a most interesting read. He makes the point that recently those that have inherited are on a Peleton treadmill (i.e., not going anywhere, and possibly even failing) while those that are founding new ventures are co-pilots with Bezos and Musk on a rocket to outerspace. I even like his East Coast (inheritance reliant) vs West Coast (founder dominant) and the United Kingdom vs USA analogies. All good points. I do have a quibble with his punchline/conclusion however. 

Let me quote: "it is now possible to found a community, a company, or even a currency from your laptop. The next step is to make it possible to found new cities and new countries, rather than simply inherit them. "

Whilst starting up a community, company and currency is possible in a cheap way with common technology is true, I have a problem with totally dismissing inherited means of forging ahead. I don't believe it is totally possible to achieve what he would like for (ambitious) earthlings to simply by relying on the power of founding without some help from inherited sources. Indeed, while getting a start in entrepreneurship, artistic endeavors such as music/movies, and learning new skills is as easy as ever using a laptop and internet connection, making the leap from your garage/bedroom/parent basement to the big stage requires more, much more. Hence I believe that there will always be a place for inherited sources of power in the discussion of making the world a better place as per Mr Srinivasan's vision. 

Consider the following:

Where does one search for large scale capital sources? Angel investors, VCs, government entities, traditional investment/commercial banks, and equity capital markets led by a small cabal of leading firms. These sources are largely forms of inherited organizations. (I do acknowledge that crowdsourcing is also possible, but that remains a small source of capital relative to all of the previously mentioned ones).

 Of course it is easier to found "something" such as a company/organization than ever before. Yet the chances of it succeeding on a large scale are no better today than they would have been decades or centuries ago despite the advances in technology that are mentioned in the article. For any company to become truly impactful and to reach a larger audience, it will still need the use of inherited institutions for many years/decades to come.

Please check out his article and I would love to hear your thoughts!