I've reviewed some of the discussions on this topic and was taken aback by the simplistic nature of the conversation. The idea of evolving a loose digital community into a comprehensive digital nation seems improbable, even with the most avant-garde perspective. Instead of pioneering new digital landscapes, many are simply returning to traditional communal living in the physical world. Starting with an ambitious vision like "The Network State" and then devolving into basic communal living without recognizing the contradiction is astonishing.
Hive, with its unique history and challenges, may not be the perfect platform for a Network State. However, perhaps there's potential for something to thrive on its L2.
At the core of a state is identity. A logical first step might be to establish a solid foundation for digital identity. Once that's achieved, we can consider how to expand that digital realm. A genuine Network State would require each wallet/account to possess a unique personal, cultural, and state identity. The base layer's neutrality should be reinstated, governance processes optimized for agility, and the overall ethos of the on-chain experience should align with a unified vision. That's my perspective on it.
Identity is crucial part, but it's rooted even deeper. It may come from various features we consider identical with others. However it's really strong when it's rooted in values. In case of blockchain, we choose to use one chain or another, and these values are coded into blockchain itself. Tokenomics, distribution, governance, rate of inflation, it all speaks of values held by community. Unwritten rules of Hive are natural consequence of this architecture and ar inevitable for sustainability of community. Of course, people perceive these values individually, and this percetion may vary, but it's similar enough to create identity around it. That's how I feel it. Meeting other Hivers IRL was a breakthrough for me, I instantly knew we have something in common, and it only deepened after talking to people more.
Another aspect on top of common values is alignment of incentives, it's beneficial for all parties involved to cooperate within that state. And at the same time nobody is being coerced into doing anything. And within certain Overton window (its inevitable IMO, what's crucial is making it wider than elsewhere) everybody is free to hold and express any opinion.
Also what I mean in my post, it doesn't need to be solidified in any form of official body, it happens by itself thanks to proper infrastruture provided. The most important part is to aknowledge the process and use the narrative for the benefit of the community. The whole process might take decades to fully unfold.
States historically operate based on strong ties of identity and allegiance. Currently, we observe conflicts rooted in deep-seated affiliations with nation-states. Consider why Palestinians hold onto Gaza, Ukrainians fiercely protect their eastern borders, or Taiwan maintains its distinct identity separate from China. These stances are rooted in national and cultural identity intertwined with their statehood.
I recognize that this reality isn't always palatable. Indeed, the empirical truth can often be a stark reflection of our most basic human instincts, which can be disheartening. Yet, we're constantly in a dance of negotiation with our environment to understand and affirm our identities. Our value systems, which shape how we perceive and navigate our lives, play a significant role in this process. Think of consciousness as a vector traversing space and time—it begins internally and then extends outward.
The first digital community to effectively address the challenges of identity in decentralized and fragmented systems will be on the cutting edge of a new era in digital statehood.
--- A Mindgame ---
Q: What will make you say this:
I will die to protect MyDigitalState. (even if it's only partial death, financial or reputation)
A: If it's self defense.
Would you agree?