Governance, as we all know, is being changed right now.

Three narratives are colliding :

• The Chinese party and other authoritarian regimes rely heavily on “domination by force” of a few individuals who, by force and by a carefully crafted set of incentives and use of force mechanics, make it so that they can impose their wills, world view and decisions over a large group of people. On the “plus” side, this model has lifted more people out of poverty in a relatively small timeframe than any other action of humankind. It drives for extreme speed and alignment. One could argue that those feats alone can drive change. On the minus side, obvious offenses to individual freedom, misalignment with extreme profiles ( How would a chinese Musk fare under Xi Jinping ?), lack of individual freedom for driving human race ahead, and low resistance to a group of special interests capturing power.

• The “West” way of doing things rely heavily on politics and getting the 51%+ part of the voters to dictate what they think over the 49%- other part, individual freedom and a carefully crafted agenda that lets frequent changes of individuals in power so there is no absolute going on at any point in time. On the “plus” side, individual freedom and liberty, having to create consensus to drive forward as a group of people. On the “minus” side, obvious polarization and extreme-ization of politics make it hard to reconcile the two groups, frequent changes in politics over relatively short time frame make for very little being achieved at any point in time compared to the extreme speed of authoritarian regimes.

• The nascent decentralized governance model rely on regrouping bottom-up groups of people who agree on a very large part of their beliefs (think : DAOs). It can be likened to the return of tribes compared to the State that is prominent in the first two models. This nascent model is growing as fast as Internet was, at the time. On the “plus” side, opt-in and opt-out possibilities for individuals mean greater unity in each of the groups, and bottom-up creation of principles make for sound foundation. On the “minus” side, actual organization of those groups and acquisition of the force needed to compete with the first two models is nowhere to be seen, and the risks of under-privileged people becoming tribe-less driving an effective dystopian society.

Blockchain is a civilizational technology. Witnessing it being born before my eyes is one of the greatest privileges I could think of.

Time to build.

Governance, as we all know, is being changed right now.

Three narratives are colliding :

• The Chinese party and other authoritarian regimes rely heavily on “domination by force” of a few individuals who, by force and by a carefully crafted set of incentives and use of force mechanics, make it so that they can impose their wills, world view and decisions over a large group of people. On the “plus” side, this model has lifted more people out of poverty in a relatively small timeframe than any other action of humankind. It drives for extreme speed and alignment. One could argue that those feats alone can drive change. On the minus side, obvious offenses to individual freedom, misalignment with extreme profiles ( How would a chinese Musk fare under Xi Jinping ?), lack of individual freedom for driving human race ahead, and low resistance to a group of special interests capturing power.

• The “West” way of doing things rely heavily on politics and getting the 51%+ part of the voters to dictate what they think over the 49%- other part, individual freedom and a carefully crafted agenda that lets frequent changes of individuals in power so there is no absolute going on at any point in time. On the “plus” side, individual freedom and liberty, having to create consensus to drive forward as a group of people. On the “minus” side, obvious polarization and extreme-ization of politics make it hard to reconcile the two groups, frequent changes in politics over relatively short time frame make for very little being achieved at any point in time compared to the extreme speed of authoritarian regimes.

• The nascent decentralized governance model rely on regrouping bottom-up groups of people who agree on a very large part of their beliefs (think : DAOs). It can be likened to the return of tribes compared to the State that is prominent in the first two models. This nascent model is growing as fast as Internet was, at the time. On the “plus” side, opt-in and opt-out possibilities for individuals mean greater unity in each of the groups, and bottom-up creation of principles make for sound foundation. On the “minus” side, actual organization of those groups and acquisition of the force needed to compete with the first two models is nowhere to be seen, and the risks of under-privileged people becoming tribe-less driving an effective dystopian society.

Blockchain is a civilizational technology. Witnessing it being born before my eyes is one of the greatest privileges I could think of.

Time to build.