4 ms·
Capitalism makes centralized democracy untenable, and capitalism is here to stay. So much power is controlled by infrequent elections, so influencing those ele
by natrius 11y ago
Capitalism makes centralized democracy untenable, and capitalism is here to stay.
So much power is controlled by infrequent elections, so influencing those elections is always worthwhile. Capitalism is an evolutionary force that selects for the most profitable business practices. People who figure out how to profit from influencing our democracies will outcompete those who don't. We can pass new laws, but that's like inventing a new antibiotic: it works for a while until evolution finds a way.
We must decentralize governance to be free. But how? We can use trade to individually enforce rules. Consider ISIS. ISIS controls territory by paying people to control territory. The money ISIS pays is worthless paper. You and I give that paper value because we accept it for our work. If you want to reduce ISIS's power without anyone's permission, all you have to do is stop accepting any money they've traded for your work.
We now have the ability to build decentralized ledgers of trade that you can consult to do this. Instead of relying on political parties to pursue your policy goals, you'll install an app that cuts people off from your economy when they break your rules. If this is a power that people desire, they must stop accepting anonymous money and only accept money through their policy wallet apps.
We're using bad technology to organize our society and it's giving us political corruption, terrorism, and global warming. It's imperative that we decentralize democracy so we can rid the world of this unnecessary damage.
- an_account 11y ago"I don't like you comment, I'm gonna stop accepting money that ever went through your hands." This seems like a terrible idea that would fracture the economy in so many different ways.
- natrius 11y agoIf you go to a store and they reject your cash because it's too crumpled, you're probably going to start shopping somewhere else. Same logic applies here: cutting people off from your economy is bad for business. You only do it when it's worth it.
- anonymousDan 11y agoAs an alternative, what about moving away from representative democracy (i.e. where you periodically elect someone to make decisions for you by proxy), to a system where you can optionally choose to cast your own vote for particular issues. If we had more lightweight mechanisms for performing trustworthy elections then maybe this would be feasible. I imagine by default though most people wouldn't be bothered to put in the effort to make knowledgeable decisions, and hence why you want to still have representatives.
- natrius 11y ago"Liquid democracy" is very cool, and it seems strictly superior to our current system. However, it will still be captured by capitalism. The most popular representatives will attract the most funding, and their actions will be as biased toward their funders as they can be without losing too much support. The big threat there is regulatory capture: promoting laws to clamp down on profitable industries, but in ways that give incumbents huge advantages because the laws are hard to comply with. The only way to get money out of politics is to make sure the people can control money.
- anonymousDan 11y agoSure but at least it reduces, albeit doesn't eliminate, the ability of politicians to say one thing at election time and then do the opposite once they've been elected.
- mikewilliams 11y agoA system where a delegate would have a number of votes they represent, and in which people could choose to cast their own vote, instead of letting their chosen delegate do it? This would have a few problems, mainly the secrecy of votes, delegates having unequal voting power and people who didn't vote in the elections.