Like any technology, in itself DAG’s are neither good nor bad, it depends completely on the form you give it.  This being the case, a small look back into history and the history of Governments would seem appropriate in order to design good systems of Governance in today’s world. Today we look around the world and we see that NO SELF RESPECTING GOVERNMENT in existence dare’s call itself anything other than a “REPUBLIC”.  How do you think we got to this point and do you really think all these different governments are “republics” or is someone pulling the wool over the public’s eyes?  Russia might be the only honest large government with no self respect, calling itself a “FEDERATION” and NOT a “Republic”. Come on, the Republic of China (lmao) or the “Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea” (ROTFLMAO), do they really believe people are that stupid, or have the ‘powers that be’ been successful in dumbing down the population to the point that people don’t know what a REPUBLIC is and think its synonymous with DEMOCRACY?



According to modern anthropologist, our first state of social organization was the Family/Tribe. We were hunter/gatherers and were dependent on our closest companions for safety and prosperity. Other tribes were usually seen as competition for resources, and the women seen as rewards, a valid opinion from a genetic perspective.  In this environment, leadership was usually given to the strongest and most able to protect and acquire resources.


When some intermingling outside influence caused man to start planting and storing for the future, there became a need for a new structure of organization including laws and militaries.  As always the best system for protection and acquiring of resources was put to use, in this case the Kingdom. The MONARCH was this first position holder of “leader of society” and exerciser of the “Sovereignty” over the land.  Often these kings were considered Gods and were symbols of mastery of nature and the people of their Nation.  Of course, simple logic would dictate that there has never been an all powerful king, as he always has his group of cronies (Lords, Barrons, etc.) influencing him and sharing in the power.  These OLIGARCHIES often employed slavery and the existence of classism was rampant.


Around 509BC, Rome started the first so called Republic.  According to Plato’s Republic, a “republic” is suppose to be a “JUST government” (later on we will see the evolution of this idea).  The “citizens”, excluding slaves and foreigners, were granted equal rights under the law and there was a Senate that battled over policy and use of force.  In times of war they would appoint a Dictator as to expedite decisions and do what needed to be done.  Normally these dictators would immediately give up control back to the senate.  But this government of “privileged citizens” was abusive of the slaves and outsiders and eventually ended up having to have “Bread & Circus” expenditures in order to pacify and keep distracted the masses that were on the edge of revolt.  When Rome fell, the surrounding tribes continued in their old ways of Monarchies and Kings.

1215 and the MAGNA CARTA

Well, as one could imagine, as the king’s empire grows, he needs more and more oligarchs to keep things in order.  Eventually this leads to a problem, when these oligarchs have more to loose and more power collectively than the king has.  When this comes to pass you get what they had there at Runnymede and the signing of the Magna Carta by King John at the point of the tips of his Barron’s swords (NATURAL LAW). This was a pivotal point in history that would gather steam all the way to the Revolution in the colonies from their mother England. The Magna Carta made it ILLEGAL for the king to take away the land of the Barron’s and Lords without due process (the right to be heard) and agreement of the other Barrons and Lords.  This is when British COMMON LAW started, and the cultural norms of the populace took priority over the King.  This was the beginning of the end of the relevance of Monarchies, even though they exist today both in name (Saudi Arabia) and in practice all over the world today.  The Magna Carta is regularly referenced as the first document of the formation of the United States of America, and the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are the second and third documents of its creation.

3 signifies that 3% of the population wanted to revolt

1776 and the REVOLUTION for the USA

Prior to the forming of the USA, the people of the colonies did not share the same rights that the people in England had.  In fact, George Washington, the largest land holder in all the colonies was subject to the King George’s whims, as the King could at any time take his land holdings from him.  In fact George wanted very badly to be equal with the Lords and Barrons of England, and the many attempts to duplicate the pomp and circumstance of English parades were met by laughter of the English nobles.  This is sighted as a prime motivator for Washington to step up to the plate as a main General of the Revolution.  After the war Washington would be KING of his own land under a “Land Patent” as all constituents of the Republics could enjoy (today your TITLE says your a “tenant”).

After winning its independence, it would seem that the USA made the same mistake that Rome made, in that it only allowed “WHITE LAND OWNERS” to participate in the Republic Governance.  At least in the beginning they did away with “citizens”, after all a citizen is a “SUBJECT” and hence subject to all laws created by the Sovereign Ruling Force.  Under the USA, a white land owner was a CONSTITUENT for his elected representative. Here we have the beginnings of the Modern Republic.


We here it all the time, our “leaders” saying “RULE OF LAW”.  Usually they are trying to pawn off the idea that they want to make some Statutes and Codes and they expect you to follow them.  Unfortunately that is the furthest thing from the meaning for the phrase “RULE OF LAW”.  It is very clear from the nature of the Constitution of the United States of America that this “SUPREME LAW of the LAND” is written to make constraints on the Government, not the “free people” (white land owning constituents unfortunately at the time).  After all it would be an OXYMORON to have a Law over a Free Person, it just makes no sense what so ever.  Laws, in a REPUBLIC are to CONTROL GOVERNMENT SERVANTS.  They are the “rule books” that the servants must follow, or be prosecuted for treason or other crimes.  In a REPUBLIC, the governments job is to “PROTECT the INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS of the FREE PEOPLE“.  No where in any conceivable manner is there a way to interpret that so that the “servants” can make laws to control their bosses,,,, that would just be STUPID !!!

In fact, if you think about it carefully, a REPUBLIC is actually a form of INSTITUTIONALIZED ANARCHY, where the people are free to do as they will (with out causing harm that would cause another to SUE them, under Common Law by a Jury of their Peers, on matters of value over 1oz of Gold [$20 at the time]).  The real problem is a well know MAXIM of LAW:  “If you don’t know what your (God given) rights are, you don’t have them”.

This would seem fairly obvious.  If you don’t know your allowed to collect or charge for something, then you obviously won’t be doing it.  People today suffer extremely from this fact, as most know nothing of their un-alienable rights given by creation nor how to exercise those rights.  Of course the Power Hungry at the top of the human food chain take constant advantage of this fact and even go so far as to promote the further dumbing down of the population via the public education system of indoctrination, fluoride, psychiatric drugs and medical drugs, etc.  Its a BRAVE NEW WORLD out there,,,, time to smell the rotting roses.


It would seem, that over and over and over again, no matter what system you start with, you end up with a Plutocracy of Oligarchs.  This is really a shame, even in Dan Larimar’s world of Steemit and EOS we are still suffering with the effects of the incomplete forethought on GOVERNANCE.  If we are to make this BLOCKCHAIN ecosystems function well enough to push out the old systems of control, we need to do a lot better job at GOVERNANCE and DAG’s in general.


Marx made an accurate analysis, that the POWER has been shifting over time away from the few and towards the many,  as was pointed out, this was easily seen at Runnymede. In addition it seems fairly obvious that to have a “REAL REPUBLIC”, one can NOT be exclusive, a REPUBLIC government must include all the people on its sovereign soils.  A REPUBLIC government must have RULES that control ONLY the GOVERNANCE and not the PEOPLE that are creating the Government to SERVE THEM – (not talking “dispute resolution”,,, that would be a ‘Trial by Jury’ situation)

As long as we keep these principles clearly in our minds when we draw up structures for DAG’s in real world cases, perhaps even replacing existing Governments with automated servant systems (as government should be).



Read other blogs by this poster at:

If you found this article useful, or just think someone else might enjoy it, PLEASE click the Recommend button next to the rating stars.


Your Remaining Votes (within 24hrs) : 10 of 10
22 votes, average: 5.00 out of 522 votes, average: 5.00 out of 522 votes, average: 5.00 out of 522 votes, average: 5.00 out of 522 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5 (22 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
You need to be a registered member to rate this.
(3498 total tokens earned)


            1. Tribal

              Ha. My first thoughts after reading…
              “In this environment, leadership was usually given to the strongest and most able to protect and acquire resources.”
              Was of Chimp societies, wherein it is often not the strongest male, but the most diplomatic and capable of maintaining cohesive order between the other chimps, that is ‘king’ – likewise, in ‘primal societies’ (those not corrupted by civilisation, it seems to have been the best orator and most respected member of the group who leads – rather than the kind of petty tyrants that often ascend to power in more ‘civilised’ societies.

  1. Tribal

    Interesting article. I’m involved with several constitutional groups in the UK – and Magna Carta, article 61 (the security clause) is their rallying-cry. It gives the Barons, and citizenry not just the right, but the duty (obligation) to overthrow a tyrannical monarch/ government. To ‘distress and distrain’ the state, withhold taxes, and to repossess properties and assets. They even roped in a few crusty old Barons, Lords and other ennobled types – and declaring war on the Queen back in 2001 (the Barons Petition, look it up).

    I’m more over in the anarchist camp myself, I’m also a secessionist, and believe scale is probably the most important variable when considering these matters. I wonder, have you heard the bio-regional movements (nationalism for green-leftists), national-anarchism, or ‘’ (Keith Preston’s website) – I think you’ll find all three very interesting!

    Thanks for writing this, very much enjoyed reading it.

  2. Luke Phoenix

    I was just commenting yesterday that I wanted to read more about blockchain governments. Thank you for writing such an insightful overlook of our history! This article was refreshing and exactly what I was hungry for. I needed a good backdrop highlighting and framing repetitive problems through history that DAG’s will need to address. Registered my six month baby’s birth info this week, and it got me unsatisfied and curious. Great depth, length and uniqueness. Keep up the awesome content!