Creating a limited constitutional republic to avoid Tezos becoming a failed democracy

Let me start by saying I’m all in for the success of the Tezos governance.

What is a republic and what is a democracy.

For the definition of the concept of Republic, I will use the objectivist definition from Leonard Peikoff:

For democracy, I will use Ayn Rand definition of the concept:

As history has shown, multiple and multiple times, democracies ALWAYS fails, this is because the tyranny of the majority can collectively decide to violate individual rights such as property rights, in a real democracy, if the majority decide to kill you, even tho you didn’t commit any crime, it becomes “correct” and “legitimate” because the majority decided through a vote, or if the majority voted to expropriate your home, it becomes legitimate and therefore correct, you can see with these examples why democracies always fails.

Right now, in Tezos, there is not a limited constitution that can forbid the majority to do that. Arthur is a genius, but he didn’t think about this.

Right now Is only “limited” by the rationality of all bakers that vote, but not by a constitution. If the majority of bakers vote to expropriate someone else property, you can bet, this will become like Zimbabwe and Tezos price will drop to 0, really to 0, nobody will want to be in a blockchain that can expropriate someone else property. But we can say all democracies that failed, were limited by the rationality of its participants, and right now, Tezos is like that.

I urge, a way to implement a constitution in Tezos, I’m all in for GOOD governance, not a democracy.


What is the need for creating a constitution? Does Governance not work efficiently as it is?

Because all the governance systems without a constitution forbidding the participants to violate individual rights failed. Yes, so far it has worked, until it doesn’t. Right now is only “limited” by the rationality of all bakers as a collective, not by an actual constitution. There’s nothing limiting the growth of certain ideology among the participants that ends up allowing the violation of someone else property.

There are many blockchains with constitutions, EOS and ICON are two that I can think of right now.

1 Like

I understand what you mean a bit better now.

I’ll have to check out what the other Blockchain constitutions look like.

Maybe we can start drafting something easily with their constitutions as a template/outline.

1 Like

You understood what I meant with that, but people do not, I mean, I don’t know how to code an additional security layer (the constitution) that forbids bakers taking someone else property due to the growth of certain ideology, I’ll leave that to the experts. Besides, this suggestion doesn’t have anything to do with the centralized entity (the TF) it has to do with creating a decentralized constitution, obviously in a decentralized and immutable way. Don’t ask me how to do that, I don’t have any knowledge or skills with programming languages.

I’ll let reality be the judge of the final truth, I hope to be wrong, but at least, if one day that scenario happens, there will be this thread…as proof that someone suggested it.

Right now, in Tezos, there is not a limited constitution that can forbid the majority to do that. Arthur is a genius, but he didn’t think about this.

You haven’t checked this claim; Arthur has mentioned constitutionalism at several occasions. It is mentioned in both the white paper and the position paper but there are more details on how to implement it on his blog.

1 Like

Thank you for sharing this, i was not aware @murbard mentioned it earlier. I will feel much more safe, if there was a constitution protecting property rights from idiotic ideologies. Thanks for sharing me that.