As has happened in many political revolutions throughout history, the “tyrannical system” is opportunely replaced by new revolutionary leaders , who have generously promised before coming to power that the change they bring with them will bring more justice, harmony and democracy to the lives of all citizens.
Very little time usually passes before these new leaders fill israel girls whatsapp number the void of the old tyrannical one with governments that are equal or worse in efficiency, justice and quality of life.
Although it sounds like a very bold comparison, it makes some sense.
More and more voices are rightly criticising the economic and political dominance of digital corporations such as Google, Microsoft, Meta and Amazon. These four usual suspects have the approval of very few.
The current state and our love-hate relationship with these titanic, all-influencing companies has greatly aided the wild popularity of blockchain. It has been very fertile ground for the promises of web3 , especially from the angle of democracy.
With Chris Dixon’s popular article for a16z detailing the promise of web3, a definition of web3 went viral arguing that “with web3, the internet is owned by creators and users, orchestrated by tokens.”
But how true is the promise of decentralization and democratic revolution in web3?