Maybe. Als long as it isn't authoritarian, protects the weak from the strong and provides the people with the most personal positive freedom, security and safety, without infringing on the personal freedom of others, it should be fine. On the specifics we will have to work together on.
But we are leading off track. Currently I would say that the machinations of Russia, China, the U.S, Israel, and Iran are not good for the world. And in case authoritarian regimes, this can be traced back to the leaders of these countries, not the population. The fish stinks from the head. So saying this or that country is bad, doesn't mean the population should suffer.
That would actually be the wrong thing to want. In an ideal system trust would always begin by the owner of the hardware, where possible, not the software or vendor they decide to trust.
First the person that bought the system should take the ownership by overwriting the previous owners keys, and from there start signing the vendors key, they decide to put their trust in. Because it is important that the system is trustworthy to the end user/owner first.
Any anti-cheat mechanism relies on not trusting the person that owns the hardware, and why would that be good?