while I agree with Naval's reasoning here, in retrospect his predictions did not really hold up for the 2020 election; all candidates were arguably from the elite (except for maybe Andrew Yang, who had surprising crowd funding support but dropped out early, although he is now at least running for mayor of NYC). This might be attributed to the democrats "playing it safe" being faced with the threat of a Trump reelection though, so I am hopeful for how we will look back at it in 2024
This is great. I think it's a little too utopian -- people are always(?) going to find ways to game the system -- but it is a hopeful because we need to be able to envisage a way of defunding and disempowering the elite, and moving towards decentralized government without a major disruption of civilisation that would send us back to the stone age. And blockchain can be a major part of that from what I understand about it.
A few naive quotes, "(big donor) Money in politics is dead" and "Having cameras will eliminate all corruption in politics" - I can't help but feel most of his thoughts on topics are informed by the preconceived notion that blockchains are the answer to all problems.
What ? you are misinterpreting it. He is not referring to blockchain at all. He is saying the only way to get rid of corruption in the political sphere is for transparency via streaming themselves on the job. This has nothing to do with cryptocurrency's or blockchain. Think DJZ
Tribal behavior is such a great description for emotional standoff. But, obviously it's more of a distribution that is largely determined by the level and depth of the demographics of voters. That being said, poorly educated and dogmatic societies tend to turn democracy into populism. If every single person agrees on bettering the lives of all people, advancing technologies should help make political activities a thing of the past.
