Where did we go wrong?
At some point in our recent history, we have lost our way when it comes to politics and government. I want to share my thoughts on what I believe governments should be and how the need for governance arises naturally when people live together, but that what we have today in the west is completely unnatural.
Imagine a world that was just one community, perhaps thousands of people. It's a rural community for the most part, with a few skilled trades (think blacksmith, cobbler, miller, etc.). Now imagine everyone living their lives freely in the pursuit of a better life. You will have farmers growing crops or engaged in animal husbandry. Most people will be needs-driven, working to meet the survival needs of themselves of their families: food, shelter, clothing, personal safety. For the most part it is a subsistence existence. Farmers who grow corn will keep what their family needs and attempt to sell the rest before it spoils. The same for the farmer with pigs and cows and chickens and goats and sheep. There will be demand for basic goods and services: millers to grind corn, weavers weaving, blacksmiths smithing, carpenters.. carpentering. If there is excess food, the population will grow. Growing population will drive demand for more food and goods and services. People will seek employment and they will move into work that is in demand. The market will ensure that balance is always sought out, although never quite achieved.
In this world you will have classes of people based on wealth. Some will be wealthier than others, both between the different trades and within the trades themselves. For example some farmers may have more land than others or more productive land. Some may have better methods of managing their animals, more efficient processes or simply greater skill and speed. Each of these groups, both the different trades and the different wealth groups will have different priorities.
There will also be a concept of what is "public". There will be public spaces - a market, social gathering places both indoors and out. There will be those who have an interest in helping the less fortunate. There will be social groups connected by interest or religion - perhaps trade organizations or churches. All of these things will arise naturally simple from people living their lives.
At some point, this society has become complex. It has self-organized into groups along various lines - trade, wealth, religion, interest, etc. People naturally feel good about being part of a community and contributing to the overall well being of society as a whole. This is what people naturally do when they seek a fulfilling life.
Out of this social complexity their will arise a demand for governance. People will realize that organization and coordination is required in order to not only advance themselves and their family, but to advance society as a whole. This demand for governance gives rise to a demand for government, that is, some organization of people who can prioritize and advance the public interest.
Now what would a government in this society look like? We know we have groups of people with different priorities, and these groups of people will want a say in the public policy. They also understand that consensus is required to make decisions, there is no king or singular ruler in our world. Decisions must be made as a collective. It becomes apparent that what is required is that each group of people must have a representative voice as part of this so-called government. So, each group will in turn have some method of choosing a representative for their group to ensure that their point of view is heard.
These representatives will all get together and work towards consensus on issues to create and advance public policy.
This is what government, or at least, an idealized "Western democracy", looks like. Notice how the representatives of the groups COME FROM those groups. The carpenters choose a carpenter. The farmers choose a farmer. The poor choose someone who is poor, etc. There are no politicians, there are only people who have political duties and an obligation to represent the people who chose them.
The different priorities of each of the groups are emergent from them living their lives. The concerns of farmers arise from their daily work of farming, and so on. It is not the case that a potential representative needs to tell someone what their concerns are. Their concerns are self-evident, because they live them every day.
This is absolutely not what our Western Democracies look like today. Politics in most of the world has followed a common evolutionary trend: Entrenched authoritarian bureaucracies, held hostage by bankers, with a revolving door of politicians and political parties that have little, if anything, to do with governance. We go through the motions of "elections" every X years and yet absolutely nothing changes, only the faces. There is no real difference between the authoritarian political parties. Even if their was, it is the debt and taxes addicted bureaucracies that wield all the real power. The governance part of the government is a side show.
Groups of people have also lost touch with what is actually important to them. Society has become a grey blob of conformity and submissiveness. People have become detached from real, meaningful work and have lost touch with the things that are important to them. Political parties now market and sell ways-of-life as disposable light ideologies. People, instead of living a life, are sold an idea of a life to live. A pre-packaged, flash-frozen identity that includes everything, the ultimate value meal: what values to hold, what to think, what to not think, what to love, what to hate, what to buy, what's good, what's evil, etc, etc, etc. Instead of these values and beliefs arising out of their own natural existence.
The only logical conclusion is that we are not free. We collectively do not have real liberty, and we have no power through the existing mechanisms to actually affect any change. Every meaningful part of our life is regulated and controlled by an authoritarian bureaucracy.
In case you haven't figured it out, I am a Libertarian. Specifically, a social-libertarian. Now don't be scared, I am not a "socialist" - that is a political label that exists only to divide us. No. I am social in that I believe people are social beings. I believe that everyone working in their own self-interest will discover that there are many public or social policies that advance the individual - meaning the individual is better off when society as a whole is better off. I believe that most people are inherently good, and that compassion and empathy are more normal than not and that all people seek to be loved and valued and to contribute to something that is greater than themselves. The key being that I believe this can only be achieved when the individual is completely free to live their life as they see fit, providing they do not cause harm to others. As soon as a central authority interferes and tries to decide things from the top down, you lose something.
This is one reason why I am strong proponent of crypto-currency. I see it as the first truly techno-social invention, on par with the micro-processor or splitting the atom. The internet for me is a bridge innovation, having elements of the past (centralization) and the future (peer-to-peer interaction).
I hope for a future where crypto-currencies and "Triple Entry Accounting" (blockchain, distributed ledger, etc, etc) allow power to be returned to the people. A future where people rediscover their true identities and where governments serve people and authoritarian bureaucracies are abolished.
One can dream.