Category Archives: Uncategorized

Social media: to decentralise or not?

In recent days in Europe the media was all over the possible bans and restrictions on social media contributions. Most of the prominent social media outlets are run by big, centralized corporations like Facebook (included Instagram), Twitter and Google. There seems to be an ever increasing urge to weed out ‘hate speech’ and ‘fake news’ postings and comments. The big corporations have been acting accordingly and went forward vigorously not in the least place to align with local laws. The tightening rules have already led to many instances of Twitter users who have been confronted by their new or adjusted rules.

The situation concerning social media last week intensified as the German law regulating the limits of free speech on Internet  (NetzDG) asked Twitter to remove a message placed by Afd politician Beatrix von Storch. The French president Marcon went as far as to forbid the use of social media accounts during election times in order to stop the spread of fake news and hate speech. In the past such law proposals or actions were associated with regimes that put a hard stance on the freedom of speech but now even countries where the freedom of speech still looked to be intact come into the line of fire.

No matter how clear or detailed a nations constitution in respect to the limits of free speech, there will always be unclear situations. A complication is that lawful actions are always enticed against social media. Especially ‘fake news’ by mainstream media is hardly regulated, correction after complaints or decisions in court afterwards are being honoured.

The new situation from western governments towards social media is clearly dangerous for the freedom of speech in these countries. A decentralised blockchain can also offer a solution for a new type of social media. In such a scenario there would be no big central corporation like Facebook or Twitter who can operate along their guide lines to make their own interpretations of freedom of speech. There are no (supra)national governments that can dictate what information is within the terms of (supra)national laws.

The published social media information would be stored in a blockchain and would be available from the ‘Genesis’ block, the very first posting onto the latest additions, so all information ever published in the blockchain will always stay there.

There will be complications and challenges involved in such a scenario. Typical blockchain data as we know it, is mainly related to crypto currency like Bitcoin. The big challenge with crypto currency is to overcome the hurdle of ‘double spending’  which needs extensive security measures to be trustful and successful. The social media data needs to be trustful as the integrity of information is from an identified poster and published information can not be altered or removed. It is however obviously that it needs another level of security than compared to financial transactions. The data being generated with social media can get quite overwhelming quantitively  (number of publications)  and is intensive (images, sound and video). From a perspective of usability there would be a need for a multi layered, scalable system where most recent data can be served to its users instantly, as where older data can be retrieved from full network nodes operating in the background. This situation is similar to the Bitcoin blockchain where now attempts are made to discriminate between the ‘store of value’ aspect versus the ‘transaction’ aspect.

There needs to be an incentive for all involved to keep processing and storing the data. Social media like Facebook and Twitter might be experienced from an user standpoint considered as ‘free of use’. Yet there is a business model behind the activities, like targeted advertising and marketing: the user becomes the product. This business model would need to be translated into  an equivalent in a decentralised world. Social media blockchain based platform Steem offers an alternative business and hopefully viable model.

Finally there is the issue of anonymity versus the real identity of the poster on social media. Operating on social media as a identifiable ‘real’ person has its benefits because it will lead to users better taking responsibility of their postings. Whenever the poster can operate (somewhat) anonymously there will be a greater sense of freedom to  express or even publish false information. That is where the dilemma of non-destroyablity of information in the blockchain comes into play. If information is false or harming the information still will be there ‘forever’ on the blockchain and searchable or findable for users. This is an extra argument for identifiable, real users in order to raise the level of responsibility. The fact that information will stay forever on the blockchain will also contribute to how people (literally) expose themselves and face the consequences of such actions.

The flip side of real identities is that users in situations where there is no freedom of speech will be heavily hindered in expressing their views and might face personal consequences from governments. In such cases a decentralised social media system might better not used and instant messaging application are probably more suited. In any way there will need to be an admission process to the decentralised social media system whether it is based on the anonymity versus identifiable discussion there has to be measures taken to guarantee the identity of a person involved.

Ewald Kegel, Jan. 6th 2018, Nootdorp

Book: Douglas Murray’s The Strange Death of Europe (Review)

Early 2017 ‘The Strange Death of Europe’ was published by British author Douglas Murray. The book’s subtitle “Immigration, Identity, Islam” gives the reader an indication along which lines the author thinks this ‘strange death’ will take place. Europe’s death is literally compared to suicide, not necessarily by the will of its citizens but by the leaders having definitely chosen to go down the path of suicide.


Murray gives a chilling recount of developments in Europe after the second World War concerning the immigration process. Although often described from the perspective of his homeland, the United Kingdom, I had little trouble applying very similar developments to the situation in the Netherlands and that probably will be the case for readers from most West European countries.

It is the story of the 1950s that saw the homecoming of repatriates from the former colonies, followed in the 1960s by the immigration of so called ‘guest workers’ because the exploding economy in Western Europe was in dire need for a cheap, unclassified workforce. The 1970s saw the start of the open door policies where the immigrants were allowed to reunite with their families in the Western European countries instead of returning to their countries of origin.

The immigration situation continued in the following decades while the governments developed new policies to justify this immigration stream, ranging from the ideals of a multicultural society where all citizens would profit from the merits of the best of different cultures, to economic arguments. Immigrants were needed to maintain economic prosperity because the population was declining because the indigenous people produced too few children to keep the social welfare state intact. Yet the population of the European countries were exposed to the less favourable aspects that came with immigration like a rise in crime figures, a population that is largely depending on reaping the benefits of the welfare state. Especially in the larger cities there has been an explosion of ghettos that urged the indigenous people to search for alternative and better places to live.

In the second decade of the 21st century it became obvious that immigration became an uncontrollable process judged by an ever increasing numbers of migrants arriving: small boats from Africa flooded the coasts of the Italian island Lampadusa with immigrants from Sub-Saharan countries. In Greece landed extremely large numbers of migration fleeing from war situations in Middle East countries like Syria and Iraq.

One of the most remarkable events from recent years was the 2015 statement of the German chancellor “Wir schaffen das”. As Germany is also the most prominent and influential EU member, her statement signalled the start of an enormous movement and influx of migrants, almost always in search for countries with the best social conditions and benefits. This meant that the migrants went from state to state before reaching their final, most sought after destinations (countries like Germany, UK, Netherlands, Sweden).


Murray shows in an unmerciful way with an abundant amount of examples that the European governments over the past 60 years have categorically denied, lied about or at least fully underestimated the effects of immigration. They manipulated their citizens about the extent of immigration and even went so far to blatantly suppress people who dared to challenge the benefits of the large influx of migrants. Murray poses questions to which no European politician ever had a answer: “when will we have enough immigrants to fulfil political (multicultural) or economical goals (additions to the workforce)?” and “why should particularly Europe carry this burden (and not for example the countries from the Arabian peninsula)?”.

After these historical and more recent developments Murray in Chapter 13 shifts his focus to find explanations for this behaviour from the European states. He comes up with a number of aspects that are foremost psychological. There is a diminishing self belief among Europeans. They have become obsessed with economic short time goals, instant gratification based on consumerism without any higher ideals. They feel the guilt of past historic events and are too tired, too weak, too disorganised to defend their social, scientific and cultural achievements. This attitude is noticeable in their efforts in the fields of art, literature and music.

Due to the immigration the indigenous people (especially the weaker social classes like elderly and the ones with lower income) feel more and more challenged and outsmarted by immigrant culture with strong family and tribal connections. The middle class finds themselves confronted with an ever increasing work load to finance the welfare state. On top of that they find themselves in a position where they only have access to loose social structures. They do not have time, ambition or resources to reproduce themselves. And in the circumstances where they do organise themselves, they are confronted strong opposition from the political and social establishment which is quick to label them with references to a darker side of Europe’s recent history.

In my opinion Murray is missing an important aspect of how and why the migration could take on to such unexpected dimensions in Europe. Migration has become a very large economical factor with more and more people depending on an income. It is like an industry where the migrant is the commodity being mangled through a chain of people and organisations, ranging from the smugglers in Africa and Turkey, the NGO’s that pick up and transport the migrants, the lawyers that defend the migrants through their procedures, the governmental organisations that accompany the migrants arranging home, study, income. And finally in the chain are the political parties that can be assured of an increasing voters base.


The third pillar of Murray’s argumentation for Europe’s suicide is based on the fact that many of the immigrants have one thing in common: they worship the Islamic faith. Islamic faith is the very opposite of modern West Europe and this leads to ever increasing social tension as the number of muslims keeps on rising.

Migrants (islamic or otherwise) never received a clear signal from the European governmental hosts what they expected from them in their new situation. And even if there was signalling there was little control and no consequences for not obeying the rules of their host.

The subordinate position of women, the aversion against homosexuality, the possibility of apostasy are some examples of Islamic belief that are profoundly conflicting with the highly secular way of life within West European countries. The line from practicing a peaceful religion to violent exposure often seems to be rather thin and blurred because of the teachings  in massadras and mosques.


In the final two chapters Murray sums up a positive scenario where Europe can turn the tide but even through these possible positive events the reader gets the impression that Murray does not really believe that they will be happening. The darker scenario seems more likely that ultimately will lead to a sharp confrontation among the citizens and between citizens and their politicians.

Murray’s Strange Death is worth reading because it is the ultimate synopsis of the immigration process that has happened over the past decades in Europe and the questionable role that Europe’s leaders played in dealing with this new situation.