Cypherium | New Tech for a New Political Age
Tags: Technology, Opinion, Blockchain, Economics, Politics

Today — this very moment — is one of the most politically charged times in modern history. Simultaneous unrest in some of the world’s geopolitical capitals has contributed to a global atmosphere of uncertainty, fear, and enervation that seems always at risk of boiling over. In Hong Kong, protestors continue their months-long demonstrations contesting the government’s non-democratic policy making. British lawmakers have become increasingly embroiled in the UK’s exit, but have not arrived at any clearer solution as to when and how such an exit may take place. And now, here in the United States, the House of Represented has begun a formal inquiry to impeach the President on the grounds that he bid a foreign government investigate and attack his domestic political adversary.

In this political landscape, tech has been elided with the industries and fortunes of the ultra-rich. American political rhetoric has largely focused on tech to target its monopolized structures and its CEOs, whose wealth harkens back to the rail and oil tycoon of the gilded age. Largely, the American press and politicians are right to do so. Over the course of the last twenty years, technology has continually promised to deliver our global societies from the social strife and upheaval of the 20th century. In some cases this promise has held: it has enabled coordination and mobilization on an unprecedented scale, and it has accelerated national conversations regarding particular policies and social movements. However, largely by replicating and amplifying preexisting social conditions, the tech industry has exacerbated a number of economic trends in the direction of inequality.

There exists a crucial distinction, though, between tech as a utility and tech as a socioeconomic phenomenon. Amazon, Twitter, Google, Facebook, and other now-globally-integral technologies have no innate allegiance to political ideology; as such, they have effectively risen the tides of the affluent, creating a historically large number of new millionaires, as well as disenfranchising the labor and opportunity of a large portion of the working class. As a result, many in the U.S., U.K., Hong Kong, and other nations have voices opposite and contentious claims as to the proper corrective action. Some call for governments to serve as regulators and watchdogs, while others demand that corporate accountability win out and that government interference in these new industries will only lead to censorship and steeper, more slippery than ever slope towards state-sanctioned surveillance, interference, and oppression.

Without a doubt, this conversation will continue over the next several decades, and various solutions will be implemented in accordance with their particular ideological resonances. Yet, the emergence of decentralized technologies offers the world something historically unique: a technology that inherently opposes censorship, promotes free association and democratic decision making, and belongs to no government.

Blockchains — invented in reaction to the 2008 financial collapse and an explicit distrust of elites — combat revisionism by design. History is made permanent and transparent through permissionless DLTs. These projects, moreover, allow not only financial association but also collective decision making and contract writing for group otherwise fractured by national, geographical, or material distances through open networks. This is not a silver bullet, of course — nor is it meant to be. Instead, we must look to these technologies as facilitators of a future in which generations to come want to live. This technology — and especially the technology that can arise from the foundations being laid now — will be used to safeguard against the violent swings in political sentiment that ultimately cause to our most vulnerable communities.