Written by Joss Duggan (Reading Time: 10 mins)

Some people will try to tell you that democracy isn't all it's cracked up to be: "Wouldn't you prefer a nice, efficient (totalitarian...cough) authoritative ruler who can make decisions quickly?" they say.

Plato didn't 'love' democracy either. Or at least the version he knew. This was the 'democratic' regime that duly voted to put his great friend and mentor, Socrates, to death for riling up the young people of ancient Athens with heretical philosophical ideas.

“Democracy is a charming form of government, full of variety and disorder, and dispensing a sort of equality to equals and unequals alike”

— Plato

Democracy has it's problems because all human systems are as flawed as the people who build, maintain and operate within them. We as human-beings aren't perfect, so is it any wonder that we haven't found or created a perfect system? (Just in case you're in any doubt as to why democracy makes sense, check out this enlightening thought experiment). But don't just take my word for it...

““NO ONE pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.””

— Winston Churchill

Winston knew what he was talking about and democracy is worth safeguarding, but before we get onto how Blockchain may save democracy (a bold claim, I know), let's take a quick look at what kind of democracy we 'actually' have.

There's more than one kind of democracy?

Part of the problem is that there's no 'one' single definition of what democracy is. All definitions share similar characteristics, but none are identical. There are many favours but the two most important versions are:

1) Direct Democracy - Everyone votes on everything. From the macro issues like capital punishment, abortion and euthanasia to the micro issues like what colour our city buses should be, everyone votes. You may have already spotted the flaws with this system.

We don't have time to educate themselves on all the issues in order to make wise choices
Holding a referendum every five minutes gets really expensive
If we don't vote on everything, where do we draw the line? (Brexit anyone?)

Direct decision-making can also lead to mob rule, which is exactly why we have impartial judges.

2) Representative Democracy - Only a few people who we think would be good decision makers, get to make the decisions. Professional politicians read the analyses, do the thinking, consult with the experts, debate policies and then make the best decision they can...or so the theory goes.

This is what we (most often) mean when we say 'liberal democracy'.

So why is democracy so frustrating?

1) Lack of Engagement - People don't get as much as a say as they want and don't believe their vote will count. So they stay away. Those likely to believe this are statistically more likely to come from disadvantaged socio-economic groups which only entrenches that inequality.

2) Lack of Inclusion - Too often, voters can be obstructed or intimidated away from voting. People find out they can't vote because they don't have a 'specific' kind of ID (you may suddenly need a passport, instead of a driving license. In democratic nations, this doesn't really occur to us but in many developing countries, going to vote can be dangerous.

3) Lack of Integrity - In many nations, we just don't trust that an election will be fair. Voting stubs disappear, voting machines get tampered with, foreign nations tamper with our elections through social media....'allegedly'. Even when malice is not at play (see Hanlon's Razor) votes can be lost through sheer incompetence. If we can't trust the process, why bother voting? Refer to point #1

And so we see an increasing trend where people want to 'buck the government' and 'shake things up' as a protest vote instead of reflecting real political values. Desperate for change - any change - people turn to extreme options...(Trump? Brexit? I don't think I need a third here

This is where blockchain technology can step in and help...

So what is this magical technology?

Needless to say, there's a lot of hype around blockchain at the moment and there are some great primers on blockchain fundamentals are available 'here', 'here' and 'here'. For our purpose though, there are two main ideas to grasp.

The first critical feature to know is that a blockchain is a registry of information that is almost impossible to hack, once it has been created. One dataset is captured in a single block, which then becomes linked to a second dataset and then a third and so-on, with the ID number of each block dependent on the content and ID of the previous block. So to change the content inside a block that has already been sealed, would have a cascading, ripple effect on all the others. Any changes would be immediately identifiable and the consensus protocol would correct it to whatever the majority decides.

That leads to the second critical feature: it's distributed. The set of data is kept on potentially thousands, if not millions of computers that are all checking in with each other in real-time. This consensus between the nodes of a blockchain network mean that to change the blockchain, you would have to hack more than 33% of the computers in the network to cause confusion.

The combination of cryptographic security (the linking of the data and their ID numbers) and the extended distribution (held on thousands of machines) gives the system a robust level of integrity. A system that has integrity, is a system we can trust.

Can blockchain save democracy from decay?

Whilst Blockchain is still a young technology, I'm sure you're already connecting the dots. Political processes lack trust because they lack integrity. Blockchain has the potential to provide that integrity and therefore reinvigorate the electoral process with greater trust.

Actually, the benefits go a step beyond that. Whilst we don't want to be voting on EVERY single issue that governments deal with (we wouldn't have time to live our own lives) Blockchain is so fast and secure that we could vote electronically.

No more having to find and attend a polling station, no more forgetting your personal ID or voter registration papers. All your voting could be validated online through an official government account, set-up uniquely for you, which links to a desktop or smartphone app.

Voting for a general election could be done within a 1 hour window, the results of which, immediately available and transparent to all once the voting window closes. We could save millions of pounds/dollars/euros that could be redirected into other government services.

Liquid Democracy: The hybrid option

The immediacy and security of blockchain also opens up another hybrid model that sits somewhere between 'direct' and 'representative' democracy.

When you vote for an elected official, you'll never agree with the 100% on all issues.

Maybe you're a fiscal conservative and they're liberal, perhaps they're pro-life and you're pro-choice. We end up having to make trade-offs that all-too-often feel like the 'lesser of two evils' (or more!).

Well, what if instead of only one vote, we got ten; each one representing a different them. One vote on the euthanasia debate, one on narcotics legalisation, etc. By default, the elected official for constituency would have our votes, unless we wanted to delegate/transfer them to other elected officials within the same parliament/senate/etc.

This is what 'Liquid Democracy' (or 'Delegative Democracy') indeed is; the benefits of politicians who are informed and educated on the issues, with the flexibility to influence the outcome.

In Australia, the 'Flux Party' are trying to get this idea off the ground. They have the underlying technology ready and they promise that if they can get a candidate elected, that candidate will pledge to vote, based on the collective will of it's party members - but so far, it's still just a theory.

What blockchain can't solve

1. Journalistic Objectivity - Projects like Real Clear Politics and Politifact have made real progress in trying to establish an objective version of events with impartial analysis but as the news media has striven for monetisation, sensationalist, polarising content has increased exponentially.

2. Critical Thinking Skills - Plato argued that education was paramount to produce a population that could realise the potential of any democratic system. Good decisions come from both accurate information on current events and the critical-thinking skills to make good judgements. (Sign-up to the newsletter to get access to thought experiments and mental models to sharpen your thinking)

3. Campaign Finance Regulation - We still have deep problems with interference from large corporates or high-net-worth individuals in our elections. Outsized campaign contributions, even those disguised and funnels through shell companies at an arm's length are still damaging to trust. The Harvard Law Professor and one-time US Presidential candidate, Lawrence Lessig, writes about this very problem in his critically-acclaimed book 'Republic Lost: How Money Corrupts Congress and A Plan To Stop It'.

So...we should just use this right?

Remember that I said Blockchain was a young technology. It's still unproven and has a lot of kinks to work out. Even though the blockchain itself maybe unhackable, your smartphone definitely is. Other parts of the electronic electoral system could be vulnerable to attack so the devices gathering the votes themselves could be compromised. Joseph Kiniry is an expert in electoral technology and runs his own transparent software house:

“We have really good ways of [storing personal votes and totals] without using something as complex as a blockchain. Adding a blockchain to a voting protocol is the worst thing you could do - it increases complexity for no extra benefit”

— Joseph Kiniry (Chief Scientist, Galois Labs Inc.)

It will take years to become a standard feature of our electoral system. Even if we created an electronic system today, we would need to keep physical polling stations open for several years, in the same way that banks keep branch networks open for those who haven't yet adopted digital service channels.

““A refusal to use this kind of technology will ultimately be a proclamation of corruption. There is no reason whatsoever, as a political figure, party or national government, that you should not want to improve the security of a result,””

— Jamie Skella (CEO, Horizon State)

But if we aren't bold, if we don't embrace new ideas and technology-enabled solutions, we may well continue the slide into apathy which in turn enables populism. Blockchain isn't a silver bullet, but if it helps facilitate the move towards mass digital transformation of our elections, it could help strengthen the democratic freedoms we often take for granted.

TO SUM UP

Democracy isn't perfect, but we can't forget that the alternatives are REALLY bad
Voter apathy is driven by lack of integrity and trust in the electoral system
Liquid Democracy as a hybrid model could give us more choice at the virtual ballot-box
Blockchain technology isn't a silver-bullet solution to reinforce democracy
Education provision and an impartial media are still critical to good decision-making
Blockchain isn't a technology for mass adoption yet, but it's almost inevitably going to be

Blockchain Democracies: Where Freedom Meets Technology