If there is a person in the world who gives us big laughs every time he opens his mouth, this is undoubtedly Mark Zuckerberg; after helping to cheer the summer by giving us pearls of comedy with his project of a cryptocurrency, the fantastic pound that so much interest has captured by the mainstream media despite it was a project born substantially dead now Zuckerberg returns to give us pearls of pure comedy talking about governance.

According to the founder of Facebook, in fact, the digital world needs rules and supervision, however it would be desirable that these rules instead of institutions come from the self-government of the community.

What Zuckerberg does not say is that in order for decentralized governance to be possible, property must also be decentralized, otherwise rather than governance one should speak of polls.

Let me explain better, there can be no governance of the facebook community for the simple reason that if the facebook community decided that on this platform there should be no advertising, the ownership of facebook would simply ignore this request beautifully.

Decentralized governance is possible only in the face of an equally decentralized property, so that Zuckerberg's words fall more than comedy in the field of analysis; the theme is even greater than that because there can never be any decentralized governance of an industrial process that is compatible with state governance.

In other words, a community can also give itself rules, but if these rules are different from those imposed by the state, they lose all value.

I can, for example, aggregate all cannabis smokers and establish as a rule that minors cannot smoke, but since I live in a country where cannabis is illegal, no decentralized governance will ever be possible; the exact same thing applies to cryptocurrencies.

I can also, at the level of community governance, establish that the anti-money laundering rules are valid only for those who handle amounts exceeding 100 thousand euros per year, however this rule would have a value of zero from the moment in which the state foresees that the anti-money laundering rules will go applied to everyone.

It therefore makes no sense to talk about community governance, as Zuckerberg did, if the ownership of the platforms is not collectivized and, at the same time, if the state does not give these new networks of citizens the power and the power to govern themselves.

In short, and to conclude, every time the Facebook CEO opens his mouth he proves to have very little intellectual depth, absolute lack of ideas, and total inability in terms of planning, however he continues to be passed off as mainstream media as a person who knows what he speaks, when he has already provided tons of proof that he is a very miserable person in every respect, including the entrepreneurial one.