voc – daniela gandorfer – legal system in transformation
Daniela Gandorfer on Legal System in Transformation
valley of the commons – 9.16.26 – daniela gandorfer – legal system in transformation
more on daniela on bottom of this page
notes/quotes from video [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g_QQQelCaY]:
felix: intro – what new forms of govern might emerge alongside commons.. how institutions may/need to change.. and ultimately what kinds of legal frameworks new societies might require
this assumption ness is killing us
daniela: originally i wanted to talk about deep in and how future legal systems could look.. but since week of gov.. maybe most helpful to show a bit of things i looked into .. ideologies behind legal systems.. because then we can communicate clearer about what we want & don’t want
to me.. this is a huge ie of language as control/enclosure et al.. binding us to same song.. we need a means (nonjudgmental expo labeling) to facil/hear the idiosyncratic jargon ness of self-talk as data.. so that we can center (org around legit needs) on itch-in-8b-souls rather than requiring any pre req’s from the get go .. ie: a means w no prep.. no train.. no common language
daniela: how to be governed.. a tech stack.. a community who makes rules/decisions.. so might be helpful to discuss social contract theory (then history of it) – do we need to be governed and if so why.. should we or shouldn’t we
not if we want to be legit free..
findings from on the ground ness deep dive on why we need tech w/o judgment
ie: the dance won’t dance unless/until it’s 1\ all of us 2\ legit free
nothing to date (ever since that day) has gotten to that root of problem
legit freedom will only happen if it’s all of us.. and in order to be all of us.. has to be sans any form of measuring, accounting, people telling other people what to do
smart contracts.. bauwens contracts law.. et al
daniela: 3 main characters on state of nature: hobbes (we would kill each other w/o rules.. property ness doesn’t exist – authoritarianism is price for freedom – surrender all rights to sovereign – need strong leader – no individual rights); locke (not as brutal as hobbes.. there are basic rules property exists.. we kill because no one protects our property.. what it means to be free.. protected property – have rights .. govt only exists to protect basic rights: life, liberty & property.. can overthrow govt not doing that); rousseau (start alone but end up unequal so all agreeing better to have some form of govt.. property is why we fight.. freedom is social contract – all give up everything.. most important is the common good.. individual surrender rights to colletive good.. freedom from obeying laws made by all) – peter thiel stands for co’s et al
daniela: i agree we are going thru biggest change in gov ness.. so all concepts are changing and we are in the process of changing them.. countries and unis et al.. all changing all .. a new wild wild west in a way
changing them ness will just perpetuate same song
hari rat park law et al
daniela: book 4th industrial rev in 2016 made that point..
daniela: a lot of potential for jurisdictional design.. something very *fundamental changing and i think it’s a normative legal structure.. a fundamental question of how we **structure our behaviors and how we live together..
*nothing new/diff/fundamental if still legal ing ness.. ie: too much ness et al
findings from on the ground ness deep dive on why we need tech w/o judgment
ie: the dance won’t dance unless/until it’s 1\ all of us 2\ legit free
nothing to date (ever since that day) has gotten to that root of problem
legit freedom will only happen if it’s all of us.. and in order to be all of us.. has to be sans any form of measuring, accounting, people telling other people what to do
**if still talking structuring behavior ness.. not legit free
the thing we’ve not yet tried/seen: the unconditional part of left to own devices ness
[‘in an undisturbed ecosystem ..the individual left to its own devices.. serves the whole’ –dana meadows]
graeber can’t know law.. graeber unpredictability/surprise law.. et al
daniela:
_______
______
more on daniela via google:
Dr. Daniela Gandorfer is a prominent legal theorist, researcher, and founder of the Logische Phantasie Lab (LoPh) whose work focuses heavily on how emerging technologies and planetary crises are actively transforming the legal system. Her insights align deeply with the foundational themes explored at the Valley of the Commons—a 2026 living laboratory and pop-up village in the Austrian Alps dedicated to testing cooperative housing, decentralized governance, and post-capitalist legal structures.
to me.. (note: warning ness).. not a legit emerging tech (at least not one we need for ie: mufleh humanity law et al) if still ‘transforming legal system’.. legit emerge/new/diff/humane tech would render legal ness irrelevant.. as a cancerous distraction to that dance
Rather than viewing law as a static or abstract framework dictated solely by nation-states, Gandorfer argues that the authority of law is unraveling and mutating under the pressure of code, climate change, and capital.
Core Concepts of Gandorfer’s Legal Theory
- Matterphorics: In her book Matterphorics: On the Laws of Theory (Duke University Press, 2026), Gandorfer challenges the traditional separation of legal concepts from physical matter. She introduces “matterphorics” to describe how law must become a creative, situated practice that continually evolves alongside material realities, environmental shifts, and scientific frontiers (like quantum mechanics and bio-technologies).
super.. but not sure if all are legit free . something ‘evolving alongside’ wouldn’t be a cancerous distraction
- Decentralized Normativity: Gandorfer is a vocal critic of “techno-libertarianism,” which seeks to privatize governance via code. Through her research and initiatives like de.RtB (A Decentralized Right to Breathe) and de.WRs (Decentralized Water Rights), she works to reclaim speculative governance for public, ethical, and ecological commoning.
to me.. rights ness and reclaim ness.. any form of re ness.. any form of m\a\p.. keeping us from us
- Ostromian Perspectives on DAOs: In collaboration with other legal scholars, her 2025–2026 working papers focus on Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs). She applies Elinor Ostrom’s famous principles of managing common-pool resources to blockchain protocols, exploring how decentralized code can be structured to prevent corporate extraction and instead foster community wealth
to me.. even ostrom 8 and dao ness (una on dao ness) .. keeping us from us
Intersection with the Valley of the Commons
The Valley of the Commons project acts as the physical manifestation of the exact “legal transformations” Gandorfer writes about. Organized around a four-week residency in late 2026, the village directly addresses the intersection of law, technology, and community:
- Code as Co-Produced Law: The project tests how GitHub protocols, smart contracts, and decentralized ledgers can replace top-down state planning with community-driven legal agreements.
smart contracts.. bauwens contracts law.. et al.. ledger ness we need more like hlb trail ie’s via tech as nonjudgmental expo labeling
- Federated Communities: Moving away from the hyper-individualistic “Sovereign Individual” myth common in Web3 spaces, the project advances “Sovereign Communities”. It investigates cooperative legal structures that allow localized regenerative projects to federate and legally hold assets in common.
legally holding to me.. creates/perpetuates not us.. perpetuates myth of tragedy and lord
- Organic Governance Accretion: As highlighted by dialogue surrounding the event, governance is treated not as a sterile rulebook written in isolation, but as a system that “accretes” dynamically through daily choices about resource allocation, cosmo-local production, and mutual coordination
how we gather in a space is huge.. need to try spaces of permission where people have nothing to prove to facil curiosity over decision making.. because the finite set of choices of decision making is unmooring us.. keeping us from us..
ie: imagine if we listen to the itch-in-8b-souls 1st thing everyday & use that data to connect us (tech as it could be.. ai as augmenting interconnectedness)
the thing we’ve not yet tried/seen: the unconditional part of left to own devices ness
[‘in an undisturbed ecosystem ..the individual left to its own devices.. serves the whole’ –dana meadows]
there’s a legit use of tech (nonjudgmental exponential labeling) to facil the seeming chaos of a global detox leap/dance
ie: whatever for a year.. a legit sabbatical ish transition
otherwise we’ll keep perpetuating the same song.. the whac-a-mole-ing ness of sea world.. of not-us ness.. of part\ial ness.. perpetuating survival triage.. for (blank)’s sake..
______
_____
______
______
_______
_______
be you. 