commit 946ca5e7a7bfaeb1ec2e2d7817af65bf3d2ed378
parent 21012e9abf47e8abbe12bacf4f0ac50b74139d77
Author: Pollux <pollux@pollux.codes>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2025 00:21:51 -0500
New blog post: "Democratize"
Signed-off-by: Pollux <pollux@pollux.codes>
Diffstat:
1 file changed, 65 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/content/blog/democratizing.md b/content/blog/democratizing.md
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
++++
+title = '"Democratize"'
+date = 2025-05-19T00:13:08-05:00
+blogtags = ['philosophy', 'libertarianism']
++++
+
+Few words make me gnash my teeth more than "democratize." It has always left a
+sour taste in my mouth like many other "mid-wit-isms" such as "climate-justice"
+or "gender-awareness", but I could never quite put my finger on why. Democracy
+was supposed to be good right?
+
+I have recently started to familiarize myself with the ideas of Hoppe,
+particularly his criticisms of democracy as a means of governance. In doing so I
+have come to realize the distinction between "democratization" and the similar,
+though quite distinct, "decentralization." I have also realized why the latter
+is vastly superior.
+
+Both of these processes seek to restore control "by the people" over certain
+services, but both go about doing this in quite different ways.
+
+Those that support "decentralization" fundamentally recognize that the
+existence of a centralized entity, regardless of who is in control of that
+entity, poses a threat to the users of a service. The solution, therefore, is to
+develop alternative versions of these services that do not rely on such a
+centralized entity. Through this process, we get cryptocurrencies from digital
+currencies, and the Tor network/I2P from VPNs. In each case, the new,
+decentralized versions are objectively superior to the centralized ones in terms
+of the power bestowed upon the users of the software. Cryptocurrencies are more
+tamper-resistant and private than centralized digital currencies, and the Tor
+network is better at anonymizing users than even the best VPNs.
+
+Sometimes, people will use the word "democratized" to mean the same thing as
+"decentralized" as I have described it above, but that usually isn't the case.
+Normally, those that describe something as being "democratized" are using a
+flawed, collectivist notion of control "by the people," which inevitably leads
+to majority rule at the expense of the users.
+
+The fundamental, conceptual issue with democracy is that it rests on the false
+notion of "collective consent," which is used to bestow legitimacy to the
+democratic process. "If we vote on an issue, then all parties involved
+implicitly consent to the outcome." In other words, if Alice, Bob, Carol, and
+Dave vote 3-1 to kill Dave, then that means Dave consents to being killed. This
+seems ridiculous (because it is), but this is unironically one of the
+justifications of the democratic process, since in its absence, the actions of a
+democratically-run entity must inevitably be in spite of the non-consent of its
+constituents.
+
+The problem with all this when it comes to "democratizing" services, is that
+this sort of collective rule necessarily requires centralization, making the
+system no better than the system that came before it. Worse,
+this collective rule usually bestows some kind of elected representative with
+control over the service, since any service more complex than an ice cube can't
+be governed via a pure democracy. This makes the system vulnerable to
+ideological abuse (a la the Freedesktop CoC board) at the hands of Marxists with
+less than good intentions. At least a privately-owned, centralized service
+likely won't fall for this, since those in control are the creators of the
+service, who are likely not Marxists, since few Marxists are capable of creating
+anything worth using.
+
+The take away of all this is: be wary of those who want to "democratize" things,
+since it usually isn't the good thing that they are trying to claim it is. Also,
+if you are able, try to contribute to the development and widespread adoption of
+truly decentralized services. Run your own public Monero node, tell others about
+the benefits of the Tor network, and steer clear of centralized services,
+democratically run or not.