I appreciate posts like these, and I hope the community won’t try to silence voices that don’t agree with the ideas I laid out, but instead listen to their concerns and try to find common ground - but also accept that it will never be possible to please everyone and that we are going to lose good, long term community members who will disagree with either the direction, or the process, or both.
What I’d like to offer as a response here is first on the “not my problem” question, i.e. should private businesses like Maker be involved in climate change? Shouldn’t we just focus on ourselves and what’s good for us?
from the initial wall of text:
The crisis is so severe, and in such a late stage, that the global response needs to be nothing less than “total war”. Every aspect of the global economy, the business model of every company and the life of every individual will change, either proactively by working together to avert disaster, or involuntarily by inevitably suffering the consequences of inaction.
Basically, you may not want to deal with climate change… but then you are just resigning yourself to destruction, because we are won’t be saved unless there is collective, systemic change. It’s unfortunately not a joke or a gimmick, either everything changes voluntarily, or we get something akin to the late bronze age collapse, likely within our lifetime. Here’s an hour long lecture on the subject. TL;DR: Mass migration due to natural disasters can cause cascading collapse of advanced interconnected economies 1177 B.C.: When Civilization Collapsed | Eric Cline - YouTube
And unfortunately central banks aren’t even doing what they should when it comes to climate action - they don’t do strict ESG screening on QE, meaning they are inadvertently pumping billions into polluting economic activity that’s now beginning to backfire by causing costly disasters in their economies. And don’t forget that the disasters we are seeing now are absolutely nothing compared to what’s already locked in (but won’t show up for another 30 years because of the climate lag), and what will be further locked in over the next decade.
Now the second point I want to address:
Simple version is, how about instead of doing all this we just burn maker tokens?
My argument is that this is exactly what this is all about. This is in my personal opinion the strongest move we can make towards reducing the amount of MKR that is in circulation. A strong direction that we can collective execute towards that accomplishes just that.
The first caveat is of course that I’m equating long term token lockup to burn, which is the point of the Sagittarius Engine. It’s an approach to taking MKR out of circulation that can have a much stronger and much more immediate effect than old school buy and burn, and in the process also works to recruit a new generation of active governance participants and project supporters that are motivated by the economic incentives of participating, but also getting motivation from a vision that goes beyond just money.
You don’t have to choose between doing good and making money - you can choose to do both and get more of both! That’s what I’m suggesting, in particular when it comes to the collateral strategy. We can use the simple direction of Clean Money to converge on decisive solutions to a number of really important tasks that are all about growing, expanding and increasing the value of the project both in short and long term:
Derisk USDC exposure: We can deal with this by allocating the assets into corporate bonds with an ESG component. Why not just put the money into regular corporate bonds? Arguably, ESG bonds have a political advantage if it’s done in countries with a strong climate agenda. Political leaders that are struggling to square the round hole when it comes to emissions reductions will be less inclined to crack down on a project and movement that is genuinely supporting them. This kind of political defense cannot be measured in money, but considering how the USDC exposure and concerns about blacklist or seizure, I think we can consider any kind of political protection very valuable.
Increase ETH collateral: everyone loves ETH, so getting more ETH as collateral that we can charge fees on is not very controversial I think. We can achieve this with yield farming, and the Sagittarius Engine allows us to both issue MKR to power the yield farming, while actually having the net effect of reducing circulating MKR, especially in the short term.
Get high quality RWA exposure in safe jurisdictions: This is where the “Super Countries” come in. There are certain places in the world where real world assets are just significantly safer and better for DeFi. Places like the UK or New Zealand where people care about climate change and being considered climate-aligned gives political clout. Meanwhile these places are also among the most climate resilient countries in the world: New Zealand rated best place to survive global societal collapse | Globalisation | The Guardian and that means we are tapping into Climate Alpha - the one thing that’s going to absolutely dominate finance in the future.
Begin professional marketing: Maker has never really been able to market itself much because the Foundation would be exposed to too many risks by doing so. Now that Maker is decentralized, it will be possible to do a lot more aggressive marketing activities, especially in the areas where we also have political clout. Clean Money and green branding that goes beyond the greenwashing most other products have to offer is a way to differentiate crypto against tradfi in a way that appeals to regular people that aren’t necessarily money crazy and aren’t being attracted to all the bells and whistles that the rest of DeFi has to offer.
Streamline and upgrade the governance bureaucracy: Maker Governance has a very complex and interconnected bureaucracy today, that is unfortunately very opaque. The DAO as a whole needs to maintain a high level of idealism if we want to have any chance of maintaining a large decentralized bureaucratic apparatus that doesn’t just corrupt over time because it is run by people whose only motivation is money. If we can truly create a movement that is about working together for a goal that goes beyond just making money for oneself (though importantly, also includes making money!), then we have a real chance to tap into the power of DAOs as a way to scale and parallelize work beyond what a centralized organization ever could.