Governance is a living thing. It is passed on from generation to generation. Some forms survive the test of time, and this process is only partially rational. Governance evolves, stagnates, recurs in cycles and is better understood as a natural ecosystem than a rational machine.
However governance has both a phenotype (which we are more familiar with) and a written or recorded form. It is to the extent that this recorded form is able to do its job over the passage of time, that we have seen the growth and flourishing of social (that is institutionally mediated) culture.
There have been several forms with which we recorded our governance. We have had story telling, cave paintings and monuments, where we transmitted our beliefs from one generation to another. Such deep stories or religions, have governed our behavior for thousands of years. When we had writing we had the book.
The book, as first used by our priests in the service of the elites of their time (Kings and Queens), enabled the emergence of law, where law is the written form of modern governance.
Our current practice of law, remains firmly rooted in this written tradition, and it is to the extent that such legal texts can be appplied to the modern context, that we have the governance and the institutions we see around us. There are howver new forms of medium in which we can record these agreements.
The new **DNA of Governance** is not simply digital, it is a performative social medium or human centred agreements that we call the legal commons. The form of ducement that is recorded in this commons is what we call monadic. It i s open, incentivised and desinged to facilitate new flourishing of legal forms, and to break out of the statis if not outright decay in the quality of governance that we currently observe.