Future of Sovereignty in a Blockchain World
* Article: No Gods, No Masters, No Coders? The Future of Sovereignty in a Blockchain World. By Sarah Manski and Ben Manski. Law Critique (2018) 29:151–162
Contextual Citation
"Technologies in general have tendencies that are materially inherent and not simply produced by social context. This is because a technology is itself a structured set of relations that enables or con-strains different sets of possibilities. Thus, while it may be true that the process of uncovering a technology’s material components becomes increasingly chal-lenging as one moves to the digital realm (Leonardi et al. 2013), so too does it becomes easier to discover the intentionality behind digital materiality: the intended tendencies of blockchain technology are directly available in block-chain code." https://www.academia.edu/36871389/No_Gods_No_Masters_No_Coders_The_Future_of_Sovereignty_in_a_Blockchain_World
Abstract
"The building of the blockchain is predicted to harken the end of the con-temporary sovereign order. Some go further to claim that as a powerful decentering technology, blockchain contests the continued functioning of world capitalism. Are such claims merited? In this paper we consider sovereignty and blockchain technology theoretically, posing possible futures for sovereignty in a blockchain world. These possibilities include various forms of individual, popular, technological, corporate, and techno-totalitarian state sovereignty. We identify seven structural tendencies of blockchain technology and give examples as to how these have manifested in the construction of new forms of sovereignty. We conclude that the future of sovereignty in a blockchain world will be articulated in the conjuncture of social struggle and technological agency and we call for a stronger alliance between technologists and democrats." (https://www.academia.edu/36871389/No_Gods_No_Masters_No_Coders_The_Future_of_Sovereignty_in_a_Blockchain_World)
Excerpts
Claims regarding how the Blockchain will affect Sovereignty
Sarah and Ben Manski:
"claims regarding the changing structure of sovereignty tend to clus-ter around three functional qualities of blockchain: first, its use as a ledger of transactions of digital assets; second, its wide distribution among stakeholders/ maintainers; third, its encryption of the transactions stored in ‘blocks’ of data linked together chronologically in a chain. Altogether, these function to facilitate new forms of trustless exchange, speed information sharing and connectivity, and disintermediate service provision by central entities. As a powerful decentering technology, it is argued, blockchain contests the dominant institutions of world capitalism.Are such claims merited? It is true that blockchain technology is still in its infancy and that there are significant hurdles to widespread commercial adoption. Pointing to cryptocurrencies’ early problems, it has lately become fashionable among the punditry to declare the entirety of blockchain a hoax (Gerard 2017). Yet we cannot help but note the prevalence of articles that at once predict block-chain to have no major effects while at the same time castigating the technol-ogy for undermining the power of regulatory authorities, financial institutions, juridical bodies—take your pick (e.g. Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan Chase; see Gandel 2015). We believe the claims of blockchain technologists to be worthy of critical attention because they represent intelligent consideration, resource investment, and strategic action toward particular ends; they are literally coding the world they wish to see. The cognitive praxis of agents engaged in social change activi-ties can be a particularly useful source of empirical data (Manski 2018). While we do not here provide a thorough evaluation of claims, we do use them as sign-posts pointing the way forward from in-process projects toward possible futures." (https://www.academia.edu/36871389/No_Gods_No_Masters_No_Coders_The_Future_of_Sovereignty_in_a_Blockchain_World)