Has government reached its sell by date?

You can smell something is off, but you are not sure. Then you check the date and you realise you have completely lost track of time. What was fresh only a day or two ago, is no longer fit for human consumption; Maybe not even for the dogs.

You have no choice but to trash it, or else you run the risk of spoiling everything else.

We all have our own view of government, but those views are mostly political. We meddle with party politics and petty debates, and end up shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic, while the unsinkable is nosediving into the icy seas. The question is not if the ruling party is delivering on its campaign promises (something they never do), but rather if society would not be better off with no central government at all?

Governments all over the world are being challenged by a connected society which has become more enlightened, involved and empathetic. The original and fundamental need for centralised control may no longer apply. Unnecessary regulations and laws are fabricated to justify a governing body’s existence, and to cater for the insecurities of those occupying the seats. Under our watch, produce have gone sour, mouldy and filled with maggots, and the rot is spreading fast. With a treasure chest of tax money, the maggots are the only ones still living in a make believe land of milk and honey.

Johanna Harris has taught high school social studies since 2009, and has a doctorate in Educational Leadership. She starts by describing government’s purpose as an obligation to provide public policies in order to give mankind consequences when we hurt each other, also known as rule of law. Basically stating that no one person regardless of wealth or status is above the law and everyone must follow the laws or face the same consequences.

I am not sure when last you have evaluated our justice system, but there is very little doubt that it favours the wealthy. At a time when the wealth of corporates and even some individuals, exceed the GDP of small countries, the scale of justice seems to be tipped heavily by their bulging wallets.

Johanna goes further by saying it is also government’s duty to care for its people. For example, in times of natural disaster, it is the purpose of government to provide the necessities of life and living so that the cost of life is minimal and the recovery period is short.

Less than six months ago, local businesses were under attack and looted under the false premise of an apparent political affiliation. Was it not the Gift of the Givers Foundation then, a non-governmental organisation, who stepped up to the plate and cared for those impacted by food shortages?

We have been conditioned to believe that society will become a terrifying place if there were not to be a central body to uphold the laws that govern us. But is this true? Are there more bad people in this world than good? Are bad people more powerful than good people?

Do good people always finish last, or has there indeed been a paradigm shift.

We are moving to an all-encompassing digital world at an ever increasing rate. Even though this new world presents its own dangers, especially as a result of the power vested in those who control it (something I intend exploring further in a future article), it certainly has exposed the benefits of decentralised control.

Blockchain technology has opened the door. What seemed impossible before, has become not only possible, but preferable. Bitcoin proved that centralised banks no longer need to control the money, NFT’s are paving the way for contracting without the need for centralised agencies or legal systems. The world has indeed moved on. It is time to smell the roses.

If a Facebook post can start a war or win an election, can a WhatsApp group not run a country?