pull down to refresh
First, I want to say I understand that government IDs suck.
identity is about building up a reputation
How does a self-made ID like Memdeklaro's help me do that?
for most of human history, you were who you said you were.
Exactly. I don't need an ID to do that.
That's why I'm confused about this project. It's a bit of a paradox:
- I am who I say I am
- I made a piece of paper that says so
If I am who I say I am, why do I need paper to do it?
tl;dr The state has manipulated people to see plastic cards as necessary and more real or substantial than someone's own statements or reputation. Hence the symbolism of a plastic card, rather than a simple spoken or written statement (or signed message in the case of PGP, Bitcoin or Nostr).
Personally I don't believe that ID cards should be required. Just saying your name or using a keypair should be enough (anonymity works in many cases too). Then your actions will build your reputation.
However many people nowadays believe that "a plastic card with your photo on it" is a sign of trust or legitimacy. People believe in these plastic cards like they believe in fiat money. It holds such a strong weight - if you are allowed to work, rent an apartment, visit a doctor, pickup mail, buy a sim card.
Plastic cards replaced self-declaration and word-of-mouth reputation, just as fiat money replaced precious metals. A state-enforced idea took precedence over something material and observable (i.e. you are John Smith because that's how you introduce yourself and do business). In some cases, usernames and passwords, cryptographic keys or pseudonyms have replaced plastic cards. But the state's fearmongering has unfortunately been effective - a lot of people really want to see a plastic card before they will do business with you.
As already stated, allowing the state to be the sole arbiter of "trust and legitimacy" actively leads to harm. The United Nations and Red Cross don't want to act as issuers of last resort. So if no one else will print a plastic card for you (that many people find important or necessary), why not take responsibility and do it yourself? This is unfortunately where it becomes a theoretical exercise, as it is unlikely that people would accept a self-printed card as proof of identity. But wouldn't it philosophically be better to have something that is universally accessible, that cannot be censored, that people can achieve through their own efforts?
World Passport and Digitalcourage have similar goals, but they are commercial and centralized. People have had anecdotal success with using the World Passport and Digitalcourage ID as proof of identity, despite that the state calls them "fantasy documents". The founder of World Passport, Garry Davis, even used his self-printed passport to travel and gained recognition from several nation-states (which is sadly no longer the case, otherwise World Passports could be a lifeline for stateless people, dissidents and conscientous objectors).
Of course it would be better to forego plastic cards entirely. Cash-in-hand deals and KYC-free services don't require one. But I think it is useful as a symbol. It almost fits into the existing framework, and makes people think and maybe question the rigidity of the state's monopoly.
For alternatives without ID cards (government or otherwise), on the philosophical side, there is agorism and parallel societies, and on the practical side, there is the infomal economy: word-of-mouth, classifieds, proxy merchants, local groups and circular economies.
I would say that identity is about building up a reputation, and does not need to be undersigned or issued by the state or a centralized third party.
Memdeklaro is meant to be a philosophical alternative to the state's strict monopoly on identity. Currently, if the state refuses to print a birth certificate or passport for someone, there are no alternative identity issuers (Nansen Passports are no longer issued, Flag Theory requires an existing passport). It wasn't that bad 10-20 years ago, when it was easier to survive on a cash-in-hand basis, but nowadays ID requirements are getting stricter. People are rightfully opposing Digital ID, but the state is already using physical birth certificates and passports as tools of surveillance and censorship.
About third party verification - for most of human history, you were who you said you were. You could move a few towns over, self-declare your name, and build a reputation for yourself. No one asked the priest or the king to verify if John Smith was really John Smith. The local church recorded births, marriages and deaths, but people didn't need to show a stamped certificate in order to find work or housing. People arriving at Ellis Island often chose a new name for themselves, either to escape persecution or simply start a new life. Passports didn't exist until the 20th century and many ID requirements only came into force within the past 2 decades.
English Common Law still has freedom of name - people just need to print and sign a deed poll document at home, and they can legally use their chosen name. In the US, many states grant name changes by court order. Under these jurisdictions, your name is your choice, not the choice of state bureaucrats (or birth parents). Unfortunately many European countries restrict or deny name changes, regardless of reason.
And the internet has been operating on the basis of self-declared identities since the 1990s. PGP, Bitcoin and Nostr keys are essentially random numbers, and any extra metadata (name, actions, reputation) is self-declared.
(Sorry for the text wall. If you're interested in more information, check the Further Reading part of the Memdeklaro homepage.)