What matters is the useful new application of the technology. It has nothing to do with the partisan politics or moral character of the user.
I disagree greatly with this. If it weren't for partisanship and moral character then there would be no need for anon coins or even BTC in the first place.
This community is moved a lot by people looking to make money and as such it is nice to see the tech in place but the need for this site is very much set in the fact that politics is a bunch of BS.
New faces and solid ideas in the future should this idea work out...we need to elect the internet rather than a career politician.
My point was that we need new applications of working trustless systems, especially to complex subjective things like government. Trustless accounting and accountability, if applied properly, could remove the BS/politics from government. Or at least, the opportunity costs of all political jockeying, underhanded influence, war-chest building, and corruption might be foregone or mitigated, allowing many aspects of government to work more efficiently.
I'm no political scientist but I do know that there is an incredible social and economic cost to true democracy, and tying parts of its process to a working trustless system will bring down that cost.
In this particular case I'm sure this Galloway guy is using blockchain-supported governance primarily as a strategic campaigning point rather than out of any altruism. That's not unexpected, but I think the ends will justify the means. And I believe it will be very difficult to un-integrate a trustless system in any application, trustless or otherwise, due to the opportunity costs they save. He won't be able to unring that bell if indeed he does manage to ring it.
I agree with you in many ways, but profit isn't a dirty word. I'm a profit-seeker. I also happen to have a passion for cryptocurrency and a strong understanding of what it can and can't do. I can try to enrich myself and try to push it in the right direction and those two things aren't mutually exclusive.