Democracy (& Governance) implemented by the Blockchain– what if??

Political system(Proof of Representation –DLT based tech for voting on policies):

* — Inspired by thoughts/comment on a tweet. ([original commenti](

*– Verbatim: rmehta: Democracies hacked by lying, autocracies by murder, Any option?       softwaremechanic: We might have to come up with something like Proof of       Representation on top of the Distributed ledger tech(aka crypto currency). Be       assured, there’ll be new hacking methods invented after though.

How to Read:

* — This is partly sci-fi and partly realistic (Only in the very, very long-term).

* — Techies do read the Techie Section at the end.

### Core proposal:

* — A DLT/Crypto coin based policy making system

* — Create a few category of policies

* — A set of proof validation techniques.(For ex: crowd sourced face recognition for   identity).

* — Create a set of proof of xxx implementation for voting in policies

* — Map policy categories to proof validation techniques.
### Some examples:

* — Policies need to be categorized based on their (primary aka first-order) impact .For ex:(geographical for land impacts on say agriculture, natural resources etc. , economical for impacts on economy   like interest rates, inflation rates, real-estate prices, etc.. policies might be SEZs,   tax-policies etc.. )
* — For Geographical policies, proof of representation should depend on land ownership   proofs, and proof of living for the policy’s governing area
* — For economic policies, proof of status of living in that area should be used.
* — For social policies(law and order), it’ll be interesting, proof of living should be   used, but how to figure out proof of living in the community is a tricky question.
### Some cons:

* — Intersection of impacts is common for policies and people will constantly and   consistently try to mis-categorize policies for the sake of   influencing/dominating/take-over attack the voting on the blockchain.

* — For Geographical policies, can be dominated by biggest land owners and so will get some   dominance by them. Will raise echoes of say the Zamindar system.
* — Will probably[^1] take more time for decision-making than representative democracy.
* — Will probably be harder to convince people to adopt it as it’ll be called   discrimination.
### Some pros:

* — Less centralized than the current [representative democracy]( (ELI5: Some chosen(generally by voting) people represent a bigger group of people and vote for them in bigger policies)
* — Less decentralized than the complete [participatory democracy]( Everybody votes for every policy)
* — More participation and interestingly, can be more participation at a segregated level.
* — Can help or work better in the globalized economy, by preventing mistakes done by a   central authority to prop-up their currency.

* — Can be extended to include compensation for the Govt. employees and subsidies. =

* — Has potential to reduce bribery, as there’ll be no way to not leave a trail

* — If implemented on a protocol, that implements an identity centric implementation as   opposed to anonymity focus, can be used as a public record without needing [RTIs]( and such.
### Techie Section: #### Bitcoin-specific:

* — A crypto currency is defined as a string of digital signatures.

* — Distributed Ledgers are basically a big long immutable hash map of strings that appends   a new string every transaction.

* — Verification is by majority consensus.

More generic:

* — A crypto currency is defined as a string of digital signatures.

* — Anyone can add a new string provided they satisfy some xxx condition and consensus.

* — The xxx condition is called proof in case of [bitcoin](   it is a complex computation that by design takes a long time, and (by putting   a cap of total mineable coins) is mostly costlier than the electricity it takes.

* — In the case of [Ethereum]( it is called proof of stake(or will be).

* — There are non-mineable coins too, which are implemented by a different type of   contract.

* — The contract(of proof of xxx) and the number of coins are defined during the [Initial Coin Offering(ICO)]( in a whitepaper.

* — One hackable issue is few people gaining majority of the coins and is called majority   attack

* — By definition during the initial problem few people have the majority and can screw   over the rest of the community.

* — Crowd sources trust issues.


* — The context was inspired by only DLT based currencies for everything including budget   allotment.

* — It will work well in a futuristic world of energy utopia.(there might be a way around,   but they’re all hard to bootstrap).

* — Can be built on top of [Ethereum](

Disclaimer, References & Footnotes:

* — Some parts/ideas were inspired by the blog [The Blockchain Man](

* — Particularly light on the implementation details of the protocol, because it’s not   clear what’s best at the moment
* — Author is NOT a political  scientist. Primarily a technologist, with some orthogonal   degrees and self-learnt knowledge in a few other fields.
* — For the techies who know about the DLT area, you’d notice, some of the PO(X) terms can be   replaced by Proof of Stake, and it is correct. The only reason, the author uses a   different term is the Stakes are complicated and need to be categorized/grouped as such by policy.
[^1] — Probably, because technology, can speed up, if we have enough energy, which we may not.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.