---
title: Toward an Electronically-Mediated Decentralized Society
date: 2023-10-04T21:50:35.465Z
slug: electronically-mediated-decentralized-society
description: The Evolution of Democracy in the Digital Age
---
In the long and evolving tapestry of human civilization, each era has been defined by the tools it has harnessed and the political ideologies it has embraced. From the agrarian societies governed by monarchies to the industrial age's democratic revolutions, the interplay between technology and governance has constantly shaped the contours of societies. Today, as we stand at the crossroads of an unprecedented digital revolution, it's imperative to reflect on this intricate relationship once more. We find ourselves in a digital age where information flows at the speed of light, yet the foundational principles of governance in many societies remain rooted in centuries-old traditions. As trust in conventional democratic institutions wavers, and as technology offers new means of decentralisation and transparency, there emerges a potential to marry the philosophical ideals of decentralism with the determinism of electronic systems. This convergence promises a vision of a more equitable, participatory, and transparent society. Yet, to chart this course, one must delve deep into the historical contexts, understand the digital backdrop, examine the shifting sands of trust in governance, and ultimately, explore the potential of an decentralistic deterministic society. As we embark on this exploration, this introductory essay aims to lay the groundwork for the forthcoming detailed analysis, offering insights into how we might reimagine society in the digital age.

#### **Historical Context: The Evolution of Trust in Governance**

The annals of human history are littered with tales of governance—stories of leaders, of revolutions, of grand visions, and of the ordinary citizen. At the heart of these tales lies a singular, unifying thread: trust. This trust has been the cornerstone upon which edifices of governance, from monarchies to democracies, have been erected. In the ancient city-states of Greece, where democracy found its earliest expression, trust was an unwritten social contract. Citizens trusted one another's judgment in the agora, just as they trusted their representatives in the proto-democratic institutions. As empires expanded and nation-states emerged, so did the complexities of governance. The Renaissance era, with its emphasis on individual freedoms and rights, led to new social contracts where the monarch's divine right to rule was increasingly questioned, and in its place, the concept of a government 'by the people, for the people' began to take root.

But trust in governance has never been static. The Enlightenment period brought forth a wave of revolutions—American, French, and beyond—each fueled by the discontent of the masses who felt betrayed by the promises of their rulers. These upheavals were manifestations of broken trust, yet they also sowed the seeds for modern democracies, with checks and balances crafted meticulously to prevent such breaches. As industrialization swept across continents, democratic institutions adapted, introducing representative systems to manage the sheer scale of populations and their diverse needs. These systems, while imperfect, were anchored in trust. People trusted the process, the institution, and most importantly, the ethos of democracy.

Fast forward to the 20th century, with its world wars, cold wars, and rapid decolonization. Trust was tested at every juncture. International institutions like the United Nations were born out of a dire need to rebuild trust among nations. Similarly, post-colonial nations embarked on journeys to establish democratic roots, seeking to build trust within diverse and often divided populations. Yet, as the century waned, so did the unequivocal trust in democratic institutions. Scandals, political polarizations, economic disparities, and the emerging influence of media began chipping away at the once solid bedrock of trust. As we transitioned into the 21st century, the pace of change has been breathtaking. Globalization, technological advancements, and now the digital revolution have added layers of complexity to the already intricate tapestry of governance. With information at one's fingertips and global events unfolding in real-time, the earlier vertical flow of knowledge from governments to citizens has been democratized, leading to a more informed but also more skeptical populace. In this age, trust in traditional structures appears fragile, often wavering under the weight of misinformation, populist rhetoric, and a sense of disenchantment. This evolving historical context underscores the urgency to reevaluate our existing systems and ponder what comes next in the ongoing saga of governance and trust.

#### **Digital Background: The Proliferation of Technology and its Impact on Governance**

The digital age, often characterized as the Fourth Industrial Revolution, has ushered in transformative shifts across all sectors of society, with governance being no exception. As we examine this metamorphosis, it becomes evident that the intersection of technology and governance is not just a recent phenomenon but an evolutionary process that has been unfolding over decades.

The 20th century saw the advent of computerization, which started as a ripple with room-sized machines crunching numbers, and gradually evolved into a tidal wave as personal computers found their way into homes by the 1980s. Governments worldwide recognized the potential of these technologies, leading to the digitalization of records, automation of bureaucratic processes, and the establishment of e-governance platforms. While these initial steps were transformative, they were just the tip of the iceberg.

The dawn of the internet in the late 20th century brought about the most significant paradigm shift. Suddenly, information wasn't just a commodity; it was the lifeblood of a rapidly globalizing world. Governments began to grapple with the double-edged sword that the internet represented. On one side, it promised unparalleled transparency, efficiency, and citizen engagement. On the other, it posed challenges related to cybersecurity, privacy, and the potential spread of misinformation.

The rise of social media platforms in the 2000s intensified these dynamics. Political campaigns, policy discussions, and public debates shifted from town halls and newspapers to Twitter feeds and Facebook timelines. The Arab Spring of 2011, which saw governments toppled through grassroots movements coordinated on social media, was a testament to the profound power of digital platforms in shaping political destinies.

But beyond the evident macro shifts, the digital age has also redefined the minutiae of governance. Blockchain technology, for instance, offers transparent and tamper-proof record-keeping, reshaping everything from voting systems to land registries. Artificial intelligence and big data analytics allow governments to make more informed decisions by analyzing vast amounts of data, leading to insights previously unimaginable. However, these technologies also carry ethical dilemmas, especially around surveillance, data privacy, and algorithmic biases.

Furthermore, the rapid rise of the Internet of Things (IoT) means that cities and their infrastructures are becoming smarter, heralding the era of smart governance where urban planning, public transport, and even waste management are driven by real-time data and automation.

Yet, as we stand amidst this digital revolution, it's imperative to recognize the challenges. The digital divide, which denotes the gap between those with and without access to digital technologies, is a growing concern. In many parts of the world, access to the internet remains a privilege, not a right. Ensuring that the benefits of digital governance are equitable and do not exacerbate existing inequalities is crucial.

Moreover, as cyber threats become more sophisticated, governments find themselves in a perpetual race to bolster cybersecurity defenses. In a world where cyber warfare can have as dire consequences as traditional warfare, establishing international norms and protocols becomes paramount.

In conclusion, the digital background of our era offers both immense possibilities and challenges for governance. Harnessing technology for transparent, efficient, and inclusive governance requires a delicate balance, taking into account both the potentials of these tools and the ethical and practical concerns they introduce.

#### **The Erosion of Trust and the Reimagining of Democracy in Modern Times**

Trust, a seemingly intangible concept, has been the linchpin of societies throughout history. As elucidated in our exploration of the historical context, trust has been the backbone of governance structures, from ancient city-states to modern democracies. However, as the digital age envelopes society, the traditional pillars of trust appear increasingly shaky, necessitating a critical examination of the dynamics at play and the possible pathways forward.

In an era of information superabundance, the gatekeepers of yesteryears—traditional media outlets, academic institutions, and governmental bodies—no longer hold a monopoly over the narrative. Today, a tweet, a blog post, or a viral video can sway public opinion with unparalleled potency. While this democratization of information carries the potential to amplify marginalized voices, it also provides a fertile ground for misinformation, deep fakes, and echo chambers. As falsehoods intermingle seamlessly with facts, discerning the truth becomes a Herculean task, eroding public trust in institutions and narratives.

This erosion is further exacerbated by the contemporary political climate. Populist movements worldwide, often rooted in nationalist or protectionist ideologies, have capitalised on this trust deficit. Their rhetoric often paints institutions, be they governmental, academic, or media, as 'elites' detached from the realities of the common citizen. Such narratives, whether wholly accurate or not, further widen the chasm of distrust, rendering constructive dialogues and collaborative solutions more elusive.

However, the digital age doesn't merely present challenges to trust; it also offers tools to rebuild it. Take, for instance, the concept of digital transparency. Governments and organizations can leverage technology to provide real-time insights into their operations, decision-making processes, and financial transactions. Estonia's e-governance model stands as a testament to this, where citizens can track their data's journey across governmental systems, fostering transparency and accountability.

Yet, transparency alone might not suffice. As the dynamics of trust shift, so should the structures of governance. The concept of 'direct democracy' gains renewed relevance in this context. If the traditional representative model of democracy, with its layers of bureaucracy and intermediation, appears out of sync with the zeitgeist, then perhaps it's time to explore more direct, participatory models. Digital platforms can facilitate real-time referendums, policy discussions, and even decentralized decision-making. The Swiss model of direct democracy, where citizens regularly vote on a plethora of issues, offers a glimpse into such possibilities, albeit in a non-digital context.

However, as with any paradigm shift, this reimagining carries inherent risks. Direct democracy, in the absence of checks and balances, can morph into mob rule, swayed by transient emotions rather than reasoned debate. The challenge lies in crafting a model that marries the ethos of direct participation with mechanisms that ensure informed, balanced decision-making.

In essence, the digital era has ushered in a period of introspection and potential transformation for democratic governance. While trust in traditional structures wanes, the tools to sculpt a more participatory, transparent, and accountable system lie within our grasp. The onus is on societies worldwide to tread this path judiciously, balancing the promises of the digital age with its perils.

#### **Decentralism, Deterministic Democracy, and the Path to an Equitable Future**

In the search for a more equitable and truly democratic society, the tenets of decentralism emerge as both a historical touchpoint and a potentially revitalized philosophy in the context of our digital era. Traditionally, decentralism advocates for the abolition of centralized authority and coercive hierarchies, envisioning a society where individuals freely cooperate based on mutual aid and shared values. The goal is not chaos, as common misconceptions might suggest, but rather a society built on organic relationships and self-governance.

This brings us to an intriguing juxtaposition: Can the principles of decentralism coalesce with the promise of modern digital tools to form a new, more equitable system of governance? And can this union address the challenges of trust and representation that plague our contemporary democracies?

Consider the very nature of the digital realm. Open-source software, decentralized platforms, and blockchain technologies are inherently decentralistic in their design. They defy central control, emphasize transparency, and promote collaboration. Applied to governance, these technologies could pave the way for a deterministic form of democracy, where systems function predictably based on transparent algorithms, and citizens can directly influence or even craft these algorithms to ensure fairness and representation.

In this envisioned future, voting systems could be open-source, allowing for collective oversight and reducing the potential for manipulation. Decision-making processes could be decentralized, enabling direct participation and reducing the layers of bureaucracy that often dilute the citizen's voice. The deterministic nature of digital systems could provide a framework wherein societal functions operate transparently, predictably, and in the best interests of all.

Yet, as with any transformative idea, challenges abound. How do we ensure that these deterministic systems, while predictable, do not become rigid and unresponsive to evolving societal needs? How do we ensure digital inclusivity, giving a voice to those who might be marginalized in a tech-driven governance model? And most importantly, how do we strike a balance between the principles of decentralism and the practicalities of managing large, diverse populations?

The journey from the trust-laden democracies of old to the current state of skepticism, and the potential leap towards a deterministic, decentralistic future, is rife with both promise and peril. The digital tools at our disposal offer a tantalizing glimpse of a world where power is decentralized, systems are transparent, and the individual's agency is paramount.

However, the path to this future is not linear. It requires careful navigation, an understanding of historical contexts, a grasp of digital potentials, and a profound respect for the human elements of trust, collaboration, and mutual respect. As societies globally grapple with the challenges of the present, it becomes imperative to draw from the past, leverage the tools of the present, and craft a vision for the future that truly embodies the ideals of equity, representation, and shared prosperity.

In this grand tapestry of governance and societal evolution, every individual has a role to play. By fostering dialogues, challenging the status quo, and remaining open to transformative ideas, we can collectively inch closer to a world that, while perhaps not perfect, is fairer, more democratic, and truly reflective of the collective will.



*Originally written in Korean. Mainly translated by LLM.*