According to Cryptoslate, the latest episode of the Bankless Podcast discusses the potential advantages of authoritarian regimes over liberal democracies in the 21st century. In this episode, hosts Ryan Sean Adams and David Hoffman dive into whether authoritarianism can outcompete liberal democracy, and how blockchain technology could play a role in that. The show also features economist Noah Smith and Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin providing insights.

The effectiveness of authoritarian regimes is a threat to democratic freedoms

Noah Smith believes that although liberal democracy was hailed as the best social model at the end of the 20th century, liberal democracies are able to aggregate public messages through markets, elections, and public dialogue. However, with the development of the Internet, this advantage has been greatly reduced, and authoritarian states can now use Internet data to gauge public sentiment, allocate resources more effectively, and respond to unrest quickly, just as China's "blank slate" in 2022 as evidenced by the rapid policy shifts that followed the movement.

In addition, the birth of the Internet has also made it easier for false information to spread. This situation has complicated the governance of liberal democracies. Politicians need to spend a lot of time to refute false narratives and raise funds, which detracts from effective governance. This problem can be clearly seen from Taiwan’s political environment (rampant cyber militia, biased mainstream media, KOL spreading false information, etc.).

Vitalik Buterin extended this topic further, likening the Internet and the overall information landscape to what Thomas Hobbes described as "a war of ten thousand people." In such an environment, everyone is fighting for control of information. As a result, a stable state may only be achieved through strong control and monopoly. His metaphor is intended to highlight the potential for authoritarian regimes to exploit the Internet's ability to aggregate vast amounts of data, which could be transformed from a tool to promote freedom into a tool to strengthen centralization. This suggests that it is technically possible for authoritarian regimes to strengthen their power by controlling the flow of information and monitoring the public.

Counterarguments that authoritarian regimes are more efficient

Smith and Vitalik Buterin then explore the counterarguments. Smith points to the example of the printing press, which lowered the cost of delivering messages and led to politics moving toward liberalism rather than absolutism. But why wouldn’t the Internet follow a similar trajectory? Smith thinks the likely reason is that initially technologies like the printing press and the telegraph simply "lowered the cost of transmitting information," helping to enhance the information aggregation capabilities of liberal democracies. However, the Internet has brought these costs closer to zero, flattened the advantages, and increased the costs of disinformation and information warfare exponentially.

Vitalik Buterin adds that centralized systems (such as authoritarian governments) are often more efficient at extracting resources than producing them, making them potentially more effective than free systems in a zero-sum game. He warned that assessing success based solely on economic output could overlook the practice's wider impact on human well-being.

Buterin then considered the fundamental differences between the digital world and the physical world, especially when it comes to defense mechanisms. Digital defenses, such as encryption and decentralized platforms, provide solid protection that has no physical counterpart, demonstrating that resistance to total control is inherent in the digital realm.

Further, Buterin talked about the fragmentation trend of the Internet, noting that this shift towards smaller, more specialized communities helps reduce the negative effects of information warfare. In these smaller communities, it's often possible to maintain a higher quality of conversation than on large, cluttered platforms like Twitter. He points to Twitter (now

Smith agrees, arguing that reducing reliance on broad, contentious platforms (such as FB, Have more constructive and focused discussions.

How to save democracy through blockchain

During the discussion, Noah Smith raised the question of whether blockchain technology could enable citizens of authoritarian countries like China and Russia to communicate securely. He wondered if there was a way for people to discuss political issues freely and anonymously, bypassing government surveillance and censorship.

Vitalik Buterin responded that a company called Rarimo developed a tool called "Freedom Tool" in Kyiv that uses zero-knowledge proof technology to allow Russian citizens to prove their citizenship and participate in online voting without revealing their identity. .

This system ensures that results are tamper-proof and visible, creating an anonymous, censorship-resistant form of voting. Vitalik sees this as an example of how blockchain and zero-knowledge proofs can provide privacy and trustworthiness, potentially creating a more secure and resilient information space against centralized and decentralized cyberattacks.

Vitalik admitted that while Americans may not need blockchain technology to communicate, for those living in authoritarian countries, having the ability to secure and private political conversations may be crucial.

Noah Smith appreciates Vitalik Buterin’s perspective and believes that developing tools that promote pluralism will help shape a healthier online ecosystem. The purpose of these tools is not to engage in ongoing confrontation with authoritarian regimes, but to create a solid systemic framework that allows diverse voices to express and interact freely in an environment free of fear.

Overall, blockchain technology provides an important tool as it enables secure, anonymous communications and verifiable voting mechanisms, which is highly promising for supporting democratic movements and protecting freedoms in authoritarian environments. By using these technologies, we can help liberal democracies offset some of the difficulties faced by the digital age, ensuring that democracies can continue to thrive in a challenging environment.

Finally, the discussion highlights the complexity of predicting long-term outcomes in a rapidly evolving technological landscape. While authoritarian regimes may effectively use these technologies to tighten control, the adaptability and resilience of liberal democracies should not be underestimated. Future developments remain uncertain and will be determined by the interplay of technological developments, political structures and social values.

This article The digital age has become a stumbling block to democratic politics! The post Ethereum founder Vitalik shares how blockchain can play a role appeared first on Zombit.