The point is deeper than this -- with such a system in place, one must never even attach their real name or address to controversial ideas.
This would allow thought to proceed on pure merit, rather than social proof.
This would allow thought to proceed on pure merit, rather than social proof.
An assassination program like this more or less defies the concept of 'ideas based on merit.'
Participating in this marketplace would be somewhat like voting, except it would have a tangible effect.
But a marketplace for violence is just as bad or even worse than the implicit violence of the state in my opinion. While I believe that sometimes violence might be necessary to oppose tyranny, I don't know that I trust the 'justness' of a system which presumes anyone employed by the state should find themselves subject to that kind of threat. Eventually (inevitably) it would wind up being used as a tool for political and ethnic genocide. Or petty crime.