I think you rightly pinpoint the fundamental reason that many of us have rallied behind you — a decentralized global economy that values interactions among individual human beings in a context that can scale beyond the imagination.
As a newcomer to this field, one thing I do worry about, though, is how Ethereum will ultimately sustain and further that egalitarianism.
In your seventh paragraph (“This blockchain has two remarkable features…”), it sounded at first like you were already describing a Proof of Stake fueling mechanism — though it was my understanding that Ethereum has yet to reveal precisely how switching to that valuation method will play out. Please excuse my ignorance, but I am still struggling to understand how it can be ensured that such a model would not ultimately recreate the very institutionalized economic structures under which we now labor. Specifically, once Ethereum mining starts to reward larger stakeholders over smaller ones, and once the barrier to entry increases, how will the consensus process guarantee that everyone is treated equally and retains equal access to the platform in all respects — instead of just yielding a new version of the same economic and banking structure we already have? Seems to me that there is a lingering danger that we could spiral into a scenario where even fewer people in the world may consolidate power — perhaps for better, but possibly for worse.
These fundamental questions are certainly the ones that pique my interest as a lawyer and now have me studying Solidity. I feel a pressing need to understand precisely how the pieces come together, and where the potential lies. More than how smart contracts and decentralized organizations will impact society and tax law and doing business and all the rest, it is this area that interests me the most. I wonder what our global Constitution will look like, and how it will even be written?