A lot of people say that crypto is still in its "adolescence" right now. I suppose there's a parallel between what teenagers go through when they become "aware" of the world and get "politically active"—it happens so often that it's practically a cliche at this point.
What transpired with governance, voting, and DAOs in Web3 over the last few years is actually similar to what happens when people first enter the political sphere: they learn a lesson in how the world really works—which is to say, "not at all." It's a rite of passage and a shared trauma that's part of the path into "adulthood," so to speak.
The biggest bottleneck to crypto adoption isn't the tech—it's culture, which has historically struggled with political engagement (both online and off) because the movement is so new. It's one thing to have all the features and mechanisms for voting or decentralized coordination. It's another thing entirely to create the expectation and ritual of public participation—which was never going to be easy.
In the next iterations of crypto and NFT projects, governance will play a bigger role because it's one of the few things in the space that still has the potential to solve a real problem in the world—namely, acting as a contrarian narrative to the authoritarian drift that most of the West is facing right now.
When historians look back at the history of crypto, they'll probably dedicate a chapter to how the tech industry struggled with democracy in a space that's largely anything but—especially during a period when board oversight has become rarer. You have all these mini-dictators airdropping novelty tokens to their investors, hoping they don't notice that it's actually worth nothing.
Of course, presenting a solution is one thing—getting people to actually show up is another. In the US, local politics affects people more than national politics, yet participation is often 10% or less. So we have to keep expectations in check about how many people will stick around during this transition into a new era of crypto. (Markets being down 90% from their peak seems to check out for this kind of thing.)
When historians look back at the "early years" of crypto (2010–2030), they'll comment that while the tech itself was good, the industry really struggled with governance because Silicon Valley—and the West itself—was moving toward authoritarianism at the time. It's hard to build new governance systems when there are so few real-world examples to model from, after all.
Anyway, if you were "traumatized" by the whole crypto/NFT thing over the last few years—welcome to the club. The world is full of disappointments, false promises, and grifts that will set you back. For some people, that trauma comes from politics, personal experiences, their job, or whatever. But this kind of thing isn't unique to crypto—it's just how the world works.
In conclusion, I'd say it's a better use of our time to try to trauma-bond with people instead of complaining about what's wrong with the whole thing—which nobody outside our bubble really cares about (nor do they have a reason to). Everyone can relate to disappointment, and you might even find sympathies and allies if you speak honestly. But you're not going to find that if you're still saying dumb crap like "have fun staying poor."
At that point, you're just talking about yourself. Stop digging the hole and start looking up. 🕳️📈