Vitalik Buterin Urges Rethinking of DAOs and Democratic Tools

Declining Enthusiasm for “Democratic Things”

In his thread, Buterin said interest in decentralized governance tools appears to have declined compared with earlier years of the crypto movement.

He listed several examples of what he called “democratic things,” including decentralized autonomous organizations, DAO voting mechanisms, quadratic funding models, and privacy-focused voting systems built with zero-knowledge technology.

He also pointed to voting experiments within social media platforms and attempts to apply decentralized governance to real-world political systems.

According to Buterin, enthusiasm around these ideas has faded partly because of growing disillusionment with democratic systems more broadly. He said the trend extends beyond politics and also affects corporations, nonprofits, and online platforms.

At the same time, he argued that concentration of power in founder-led organizations and centralized institutions has contributed to that shift.

A Shift From “Stable Era” to “Chaotic Era”

Buterin contrasted the early 2000s and 2010s with today’s environment.

During that earlier period, many technologists believed large-scale democratic innovations could reshape governance. Ideas such as nationwide quadratic voting systems or large DAOs funding public goods felt realistic.

However, he said the current global environment feels more chaotic. In such conditions, he argued that democratic tools should focus less on rigid decision-making mechanisms and more on helping groups coordinate and express collective opinions.

Instead of strict binding votes, he suggested tools like anonymous polling systems, assurance contracts, and hybrid governance models that combine prediction markets with voting.

These approaches could help distributed communities organize their views even when political or institutional systems are unstable.

ZK Voting and Privacy Tools

Buterin also highlighted the potential of privacy-focused voting systems built with zero-knowledge technology.

Such systems allow people to verify their eligibility to vote without revealing their identity. In his thread, he mentioned ZKpassport-style approaches and tools like Freedom Tool, which developers have used in experiments involving anonymous civic participation.

He suggested these technologies could give groups a credible collective voice even in politically sensitive environments.

AI Could Transform Democratic Participation

One of Buterin’s most optimistic arguments focused on the role of artificial intelligence.

He said AI could dramatically increase participation in decentralized governance systems. According to Buterin, AI agents or “LLM shadows” trained on a person’s writing and actions could potentially vote or participate in governance processes on their behalf.

That approach could allow individuals to contribute input to large-scale decision-making without constantly monitoring proposals or debates.

He also noted that AI systems could incorporate private information into decision-making while still protecting confidentiality through cryptographic methods.

In effect, he suggested that AI could remove many of the practical barriers that currently limit participation in decentralized governance.

Balancing Egalitarianism and Pluralism

Buterin also discussed how governance systems should balance equality with diversity of viewpoints.

He argued that systems should ensure every group has at least some voice in decision-making, even if their influence is limited. At the same time, governance structures should encourage pluralism and avoid concentration of power among a single elite group.

Mechanisms such as quadratic voting could help surface a broader range of voices while preventing dominance by wealthy participants.

A Call for a New Governance Cycle

Despite the current skepticism around decentralized governance, Buterin said the next wave of democratic experimentation should begin sooner rather than later.

He argued that growing dissatisfaction with centralized power structures could eventually renew interest in decentralized alternatives.

However, he cautioned that future experiments must learn from earlier failures and adapt to today’s more complex and volatile environment.

According to Buterin, the combination of AI, stronger cybersecurity, and advanced cryptography creates new opportunities to design governance systems that were not technically feasible a decade ago.

If those tools are used effectively, he suggested, decentralized democratic models could become far more practical than previous attempts.