[konart]

>democracy is being dismantled not by coups or tanks, but by code, capital, and the illusion of innovation

Not sure "code" belongs here. Even less sure about "illusion".

Take those away and what is left is "dismantled... by capital". Nothing new, really.

[edu]

Code absolutely belongs there. Like any technology (be it printing presses, weapons, or algorithms) code is neutral by design, but not by impact.

It can bolster democracies or undermine them. The real agency lies with those who wield it. And it's rarely the coders. It's the leaders, the platforms, the systems that choose how code is deployed.

[pjc50]

Does open source code count as "capital"? It also has a real and significant effect.

[konart]

That's my point. Any tech can (and is) used for this. There's really no point in putting word "code" there. It adds very little additional context. Only in my opinion mostly serves the other goal - to sell.

[mc32]

You can argue the same for the capital that goes in. It’s used for what it’s used. By itself it’s neutral.

[dataflow]

I don't think you can make this argument. Capital is neither neutral, nor a technology. Currency would at least satisfy one of those two. But capital is a broader concept that is pretty much by definition a form of power, and power's natural tendency is to lead to corruption.

[konart]

Yes, but I think that questions like

1. How come people are able to accumulate so much capital?

2. How come people are able to use the capital to influence life of other people in all ways possible to their liking?

are more interesting and worth asking.

Yes code and capital are both "tools". But you can't just write some code and install cameras at every corner. You need some political influence to do so. And capital buys you this influence.

[mc32]

It’s a power distribution law. You can try to influence it artificially and suppress it to varying results.

It’s kind of like asking why are there so many small quakes and why do there have to be great big quakes once in a while? Why don’t we just get millions more small quakes instead?

[Arainach]

>How come people are able to use the capital to influence life of other people in all ways possible to their liking?

This sentence applies to "code" as well as to "capital"

[jmye]

And yet you can “just write some code” and weapons a generation of young men, and cause an incredible increase in depression in a generation of young women.

Pretending code has no direct and obvious impact is rank naivety.

[croes]

By code doesn’t mean all code it just describes the modus operandi to distinguish them from the old type that used oil for instance

[konart]

Again, this is my point: there's no real reason to distinguish them from the old types. :)

[lm28469]

Have you heard about palantir ? Flock? Prism?

One day you're chasing terrorism, the next you're chasing ecologists, political opponents, unions, minorities, &c.

[amiga386]

Code:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_says_no

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computers_Don%27t_Argue

https://simonwillison.net/2025/Feb/3/a-computer-can-never-be...

[BirAdam]

If we’re being honest, democracy, such as it is, is being dismantled by people. Code, capital, and illusion have no volition.

[fakedang]

And why not code? Are facial recognition models, AI LLMs to spew out spam and addictive social media algorithms not backed by code? The kings and dictators of the past had a lot more capital than Silicon Valley, but could only dream of building such surveillance and propaganda capabilities, as is the case even in a number of tinpot dictatorships in the developing world.

[konart]

>Are facial recognition models, AI LLMs to spew out spam and addictive social media algorithms not backed by code?

Sure, just like tank is backed by metallurgy and engineers.

>The kings and dictators of the past had a lot more capital than Silicon Valley, but could only dream of building such surveillance and propaganda capabilities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_Richelieu (and not only him most likely) would disagree.

Soviet union had surveillance and propaganda capabilities you can't even imagine without any of LLM etc.

Surely new tech makes things easier and cheeper, but doesn't change the basic principles.

My point is exactly this: code makes things move faster for everyone, so you can really remove if from the sentence and nothing will change. In adds no meaningful context. It mostly sells.

[fakedang]

If Cardinal Richelieu had today's tracking, he'd be on another level. As would the Soviet Union - imagine being able to crush opposition in the satellites without any violence. Heck, no need to imagine - Russia already does that today. Simply put, with today's social media tech, backed by today's code, there would be no Walesa, no Nagy, no Soviet dissolution, nothing.

[croes]

And how did they get those capital, for instance the CEO of Meta?

And isn’t social media that prefers rage over information a danger to democracy?

[konart]

>And how did they get those capital, for instance the CEO of Meta?

This is the right question.

I'll quote myself here:

1. How come people are able to accumulate so much capital?

2. How come people are able to use the capital to influence life of other people in all ways possible to their liking?

Yes code and capital are both "tools". But you can't just right some code and install cameras at every corner. You need some political influence to do so. And capital buys you this influence.

And to get this capital you should have laws that allow you to do so (tax rates, evasion etc).

Same goes for political influence.

[Arainach]

>Yes code and capital are both "tools". But you can't just right some code and install cameras at every corner. You need some political influence to do so. And capital buys you this influence.

You absolutely can. Tiny tweaks to social media feeds - what content gets promoted, what gets hidden - have massive impacts on opinions, votes, and society.

[arthurofbabylon]

It sounds like this book would be a good candidate for your reading list.

[konart]

It would be great if you have tried to express yourself other than some weird implications.

[arthurofbabylon]

The comment is sincere. You appear to disagree with the book’s argument prior to having heard it — a great candidate for a mind-opening read. If the book (once published) proves its premise, you’ll disproportionately benefit from the read. (I personally like it when a book stretches my existing conceptions.)

[konart]

I thing you might have misunderstood me.

I do not disagree with the book's argument. I'm just pointing out (or rather expressing my doubt) that the word "code" brings no additional context to the sentence.

As others (and I) rightfully noted - code and modern tech does make things cheaper and easier, but this can be said about all advances.

The "nerd reich" is not possible without code, code is not possible without computers, computers are not possible without abacus etc.

As I see it the word "code" sells this book better than, say, "taxes". Because taxes are boring and obvious.

[jelder]

The purpose of software is to reduce the cost of change.

Of course “code” belongs here.

[mariusor]

I take parent's meaning to be that "code" is redundant in the repetition not blameless.

[konart]

Yes, thank you.

[nephihaha]

It is being dismantled by those who claim that the public can't have a say but that we should go to "official sources" (government appointed) or "trusted sources" (their pals) to avoid misinformation. This isn't capitalist driven (the standard Marxist line) because this system limits profits and maximalises government control.

[tim333]

Most of the real democracy dismantling attempts in the world seem more along the lines of the Russians centuries old effort to have everything loyal to the Tzar, including Trump.