# Democratic legitimacy

`kaal:entity:democratic-legitimacy`

**Status.** derived

This node is assembled mechanically from the 3 claims that carry the concept tag `democratic-legitimacy`. It is a roster of what the corpus says under this term. It is **not** an adjudicated definition: no single statement here has been ruled canonical, and no first-appearance call has been made. Read the claims and judge for yourself.

## Every claim under this term

3 claims across 3 works, 2021 to 2024.

**2021**

- [3808873-019](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3808873-019) [mechanism/argued] *(failure mode)* -- As code proliferates as law, the democratic legitimacy of coded legal arrangements is increasingly called into question, because private actors have assumed governance tasks traditionally belonging to democratically elected sovereign states and may circumvent democratically legitimized governments.
  > Given the proliferation of code as law, the democratic legitimacy of coded legal arrangements are increasingly called into question. Through code, private actors have created governance tasks that were traditionally the responsibility of democratically elected sovereign states and state actors.
  Wulf A. Kaal, Decentralization Neutralizers (2021). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3808873

**2024**

- [4685567-003](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/4685567-003) [mechanism/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Impact 1.0 foundations developed plutocratic power structures because their leaders and trustees were never democratically elected, and Impact 3.0 addresses this by adding WEB3 collaborative democratic measures on top of the existing foundation structures.
  > further improve Impact 1.0 private foundations by adding collaborative WEB3 democratic measures that address plutocratic power structures in Impact 1.0 foundations that originated in the lack of democratic elections of Impact 1.0 foundations' organizations' leaders or trustees.
  Wulf A. Kaal, Impact Investing Innovation - From Impact 1.0 to 3.0 (2024). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4685567
- [5254152-032](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/5254152-032) [failure/evidenced] *(failure mode)* -- Subjecting every community vote to review by a council that is not democratically elected defeats the governance value of community voting, as scored for Goldfinch DAO with a governance score of 2.
  > involves all community votes being reviewed by the council, which is not democratically elected (G: 2).
  Wulf A. Kaal, DAO Market Meta Analysis 2024 (2024). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=5254152

## Verify

Every claim above resolves to a record carrying a verbatim source quote, the sha256 of the source PDF, and a preformatted citation. Nothing here asks to be taken on trust.

    curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/entities/democratic-legitimacy.md | sha256sum

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of this entity node. Its sha256 is the content hash.