I’m thinking about democracy and human nature in general for a while now, related to liquid democracy in the Cardano eco system. There are some questions I didn’t find an answer for yet:
The problem I see is the laziness and indifference of people when it comes to voting. As the records show, if there is no additional incentive other than keeping the values, democracy stands for, people tend to think, their vote doesn’t matter, and the others will do it right for them (see Brexit). So my question is, whether you already have game theoretically considered, to add an incentive for people to vote (treasury and governance)? What’s the path, to avoid, people just delegating all the thinking work to delegates, not because of the lack of knowledge but because of laziness, because voting for a feature, for example, needs investment in time and thinking? Will they earn more staking rewards if they are actively voting rather than passive?
My biggest concern is about democracy in general. When I recently discovered the following article https://hackernoon.com/what-will-bitcoin-look-like-in-twenty-years-7e75481a798c (which is generally a great read btw.), I found a paragraph which expressed my concern greatly:
"…Remember American psychologist Gustave Gilbert’s talk with Nazi Herman Goring during the Nuremberg trials? Goring told him that most people will go along with whatever their leaders tell them to do without question, whether it’s a democracy or fascist dictatorship.
- Naively, Gilber replied, “There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.”
But Goring only laughed and said, “Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”
- “The main challenge is that very few people can agree on what is good or bad in a system and ideology tends to warp those concepts into unrecognizable messes. It will be incredibly easy to create a ruleset that enslaves us all if we’re not careful.”
- “If the Internet has taught us anything it’s that open systems tend towards centralization and given enough time central powers can and will subvert and corrupt any system to their own ends.”
How can this fundamental problem be avoided/solved in Cardano?
The majority of voters may have good intent, and also the delegates are good, but if only delegates vote for features, for example, you can’t blame them for doing wrong, because there is no objective way to say, what feature would have been better for the majority.
- In this regard, another problem at feature voting is the fact, that often everything which seams to be easy to implement, is difficult in software development and vice versa. So, if for instance, several 3rd parties submit a proposal for their project to getting funded by the treasury, then those who offer a seemingly difficult feature will have to invest less efforts and resources than those, doing it the other way around, but they will end up getting less funding, than the others. It will take a lot of project marketing to explain and convince people.
How to solve this?