Quote from: Terk on May 16, 2013, 11:58:07 AM

Quote from: coastermonger on May 16, 2013, 05:30:59 AM

It occurred to me today that bitcoin is not democratic. The direction of the blockchain is determined by majority yes, but certain people hold more of it than others.

Well, I think it's as much democratic as our current implementations of democracy in our political systems.

Sure, everyone has his vote, but you you need to get to know about someone and get convinced to vote for him. At the end of the day it turns out, that number of votes acquired is highly related to amount of money spent on campaign. It isn't 1-to-1 of course, as people's preferences and quality of offer also matter, but the best offer/idea without funding won't get as many votes as the worst offer/idea with huge funding. Number of votes for similar quality ideas will be strictly related to amount of funding spent on promoting them.

Democracy is a system where power is concentrated with people who invested the most in the system. This seems very similar to bitcoins to me.

Because there's nothing which says "you must use bitcoin or forfeit your life," that makes it significantly more democratic than any "current implementations of democracy."

The same is not true for the aforementioned "current implementations of democracy." Suppose I live in the US and I do not support any war. The fact is that I am required "by law" to fund it. What that means is if I refuse to fund it (by not paying taxes), I can face many years in a cage, and if I resist, I can be shot. Yes, I'm permitted to verbally disagree, yet I have no freedom to disagree financially.

If I disagree with "bitcoin," the alternatives do not threaten my person or property.