We don't need crypto to talk about decentralization
2022-11-29
Background: I was invited by Claire Ingram Bogusz to share my thoughts on “digital collective entrepreneurship” with a particular focus on the potential of so-called “decentralized autonomous organizations” (DAOs) and blockchains. This took the form of a panel discussion at the research foundation Entreprenörskapsforum. Here follows a transcription of my address.
(originally published in Swedish here)
—
Blockchain and DAOs are introduced with promises of decentralization, democratization, participation, trust, simplification, and more. The fact that these promises appeal to us indicates that we’re simply not happy with how things turned out - on the internet (as well as in society at large) we see centralization and concentration of power.
But let’s look honestly and soberly at these promises and tell it like it is: The fact that we, niche after niche, seem to end up with private platform monopolies or at best oligopolies, is no coincidence. It’s a natural consequence of a) digital technology’s propensity for rapid scaling but also b) a venture capital-soaked startup culture where everything is permeated by the idea of exponential scaling and growth, and where the lion’s share of returns from the lucky few who become unicorns ends up with what is, on the whole, a very small group of people.
I believe the questions Claire raises are important. Very important. Do we need new ways, more ways, to organize ourselves creatively to meet “the grand challenges” of our time? I look at this city and think about all the hundreds of thousands of programmers - all these smart people - how many are working on solving the major problems of our time?
Something isn’t quite right.
Do I believe that blockchain and the crypto movement will lead us out of this? I don’t see it as likely, and this is for two reasons:
1. the first is technical - the crises in the world exist off-chain. They cannot be reduced to smart contracts. As soon as you want to do something interesting in the world, you need to step away from the idea of being able to formulate it as a line of code. The world is, in short, messy - and blockchain technologies like purity and simplicity. Transactions. Ownership. It’s no coincidence that it’s within fintech where it has so far achieved “success” (if one should call it that)
2. the second reason is cultural. The same hyperfocus on global scaling, economification of everything, incentive structures, transactions, growth, and returns that in my opinion constitutes the very root of many problems we see today, also permeates the crypto movement, perhaps to an even greater extent. I’m happy to be convinced otherwise and I certainly don’t have the complete picture, but I haven’t yet seen any strong signs that I should reconsider my general position.
Lastly - let me say this. Approach these questions with an open mind: we don’t need to take the detour through crypto to talk about grand challenges, decentralization, and democratization of creation.
Reflection
Even though I might draw different conclusions than Claire, I’m grateful for her invitation and the opportunity to formulate and communicate my thoughts on this subject. I also give a rose 🌹 to the organizers at Entreprenörskapsforum - who didn’t throw me out despite questioning truths such as entrepreneurship being good in itself regardless of its purpose.
My personal process leading up to the panel discussion awakened dormant thoughts on the theme of innovation and entrepreneurship that I hope to do something more with. At the core, I’m trying to put into words why I, in a disillusioned state, left what has later been called “the Swedish startup miracle” - and what I hope for instead.