Centralisation can basically be understood as the “gathering to a centre”.1 As such the concept is opposed to that of decentralisation which then must be considered as the 'dispersing from a center' or the 'gathering to a periphery'. In a centralisation givens are moving towards a center and in a decentralisation they are moving towards a periphery. These concepts have diverse practical applications. In settlement geography for instance the centralisation and decentralisation have reference to the settlement movements of people towards city centers or away therefrom. In politics the concepts have reference to the centralisation or decentralisation of political power, such as in dictatorships or monarchies in the first case and democracies in the latter. And in another, more recent, example the concepts have reference to financial control, whereby the control of banks is seen as a typical example of centralisation and the development of blockchain technology as initiating a decentralisation of financial control.
Interesting here to mention is that the constellation of Aquarius is considered as conferring the energy of decentralisation.2 Thus in the coming age of Aquarius3 we may expect to see an emphasize on decentralisation.4 This tendency of decentralisation we see already in the glorification of democracy over dictatorship or monarchy. More recent glorifications of decentralisation we find in in the blockchain technology scene, where this technology is similarly glorified at the expense of banking institutions because of its decentralized model.
So it may be expected that in the new age of Aquarius a further emphasis will be laid on decentralisation and that the latter will be further glorified. It must not be forgotten however that decentralisation is right in its own place but that its glory is only relative and dependent upon its own era. In the larger picture centralisation and decentralisation are equally virtuous or equally vicious.
Basically centralisation and decentralisation are nothing more than modifications on the same level and not inherently ethical. When a centralized financial system is corrupted for instance the decentralisation of the system will also lead to the decentralisation of the inherent financial corruption, and it will not ban the latter out. In such a case only a modification on the horizontal line has taken place.5 What is actually needed and a true ethical improvement however is a modification on the vertical line. What is really needed is elevation. Let us thus in the new age welcome decentralisation but, more importantly, embrace elevation.