2 Comments

If people don't bother to read a government program, why would it be otherwise towards a blockchain?

Expand full comment
author

That's a fair point.

In the essay, I argued that people's inertia towards governmental (not political) matters comes (at least partially) from the lack of clarity between their votes and the subsequent improvement in their quality of life/transparency.

I argue that with greater transparency, there's less opportunity for corruption/shadiness, which undermines people's confidence in institutions.

Higher levels of confidence and the greater number of public referendums enabled by the blockchain would work towards fixing the lack of trust, while prompting people to more actively participate in governance.

Participants that trust a system and feel their actions have more weight in the behaviour of it are more likely to engage with it.

More people engaging unlocks network effects where even more people are led to engage (just like the greater number of likes on a social media post leads to even more likes).

More engagement leads to a search for a deeper understanding. Quoting Slavoj Žižek, "and so on and so on!" :p

Profit!

Thanks for commenting =)

Expand full comment