“Democracy is a technology. Like any technology, it gets better when more people strive to improve it.”

– Audrey Tang, Taiwan’s first digital minister

There is increasing momentum in the world of “digital democracy”. But I don’t think the general public understands what digital democracy is, nor its potential to make the world a better place.

In a very general sense, digital democracy just means the use of digital technology in the democratic process. But digital democracy is more than just a government I.T. department. Its potential is not limited to making existing democratic processes more efficient and modern. Rather, it promises a new paradigm for democracy that is more fundamentally democratic, because citizens more directly and effectively control government. New technology not only makes more direct participation possible; it can make democratic processes more fair, transparent, and resistant to manipulation and concentration of power; it can help people make decisions that are more informed and intelligent; and it can help groups overcome the dilemmas of collective action that prevent us from coordinating to solve some of humanities biggest problems.

Democracy as Technology

In a sense, democracy is a decision-making technology. But today’s democracies still use archaic technologies such as plurality voting, single-member districts, 12-member juries, ballot boxes, committees, and filibusters. Contrast this with modern disciplines and technologies such as social choice theory and political science, public-key cryptography and zero-knowledge proofs, quadratic voting and citizens assemblies. Although there is room for difference of opinion on the ideal form of government, our knowledge has advanced well beyond our practice, and many the more archaic democratic technologies only propagate because of resistance to change.

But as little-by-little new governments do form and existing governments enact radical change, there is opportunity to apply state-of-the-art technologies to new democratic processes and to the new constitutions themselves. These modern democracies can be called “digital democracies” just because the best democratic technologies will naturally involve digital technology.

Risks

But technology can also threaten democracy. It can allow a group to be more effective, but what if that group is a special interest, an autocratic regime, or an enemy state?

Unfortunately, tools that threaten democracy can look deceptively similar to the tools that can strengthen it. For example, tools for collecting public “input” allow people’s voices to be “heard”. But to be heard by whom? Intelligence on public opinion can be used either to serve or to manipulate the people.

Similarly, tools for online governance can allow specific groups to better coordinate in pursuit of their interests. But this makes groups without access to these tools even less empowered.

So technology only strengthens democracy as far as it puts power into the hands of the people, and helps them exercise that power equally.

Binding Participatory Decision-Making Processes

Thus technology under the rubric of “digital democracy” must be more than mere tools for deliberation, public input, or governance. Their true north must be enabling processes for binding group decision-making that give actual and complete power to the people. The challenge is making these processes as fair and unbiased as possible, while also enabling groups to manifest their collective intelligence and effectively advance their collective interests.

So these technologies must address the problems of identity and constituency, and the reality that people have differing abilities or willingness to participate. They must consider the problem of misinformation and manipulation, helping people make informed decisions about what truly advances their interests, so that decision-making agency truly rests with the people, and not just those who can control the flow of information. They must incorporate the lessons from social choice theory about fair voting, and the lessons from social media about the danger of echo chambers and polarization. They must be designed to help groups not only make good decisions, but to get better at making decisions, and build a culture of participatory decision-making: to develop solidarity and trust, and build common knowledge of shared goals and beliefs.

So digital democracy is a truly ambition project. It unites ancient philosophical questions about democracy and freedom with cutting edge technology, promising to revolutionize the way we solve the great problems that face humanity.