Even though I don't actually believe a society like the one in "The Hunger Games" will come about any time soon (or ever), this article will explore what led to such a society, and what needs to change now to prevent a similar society from existing. A common theme throughout history has been humanity realizing evil too late, allowing it to flourish before rejecting it.
The belief in legitimate authority is the main reason why the people in "The Hunger Games" put up with the tyranny and even viewed it as justified, until some "troublemakers" like Katniss and other rebels decided President Snow and the government don't have the right to forcibly control the Districts.
Listen to Snow's address below and consider how much of it sounds like what we have been taught about the role of government, the social contract, and taxes.
Just like the citizens of Panem believed they would starve if they weren't forced to give part of the fruits of their labor to the Capitol, many people today think that society won't be able to function without the government forcing them to pay taxes, which is why the vast majority believe they should be forced to pay taxes instead of having the choice to decide for themselves how to spend their money.
Since people have been taught that government has authority and is therefore legitimate (which is just silly circular reasoning), along with hearing similar messages nonstop from the mainstream media, they have a hard time perceiving it for what it truly is: a gang that violently dominates and extorts society by force through laws and taxation.
While the actions of the law enforcers in "The Hunger Games" were obviously evil and unjust, the people in Panem didn't see them that way. Instead, they saw the Capitol and its enforcers as protectors; exactly how most people view their governments today, even though the governments force and control them against their will on a regular basis.
At the end of "The Hunger Games", the resolution is free elections, which in reality don't prevent tyranny from occurring or continuing at all. If the people still believe in authority, the government will expect them to comply with whatever laws it passes, no matter how oppressive they are, because the nature of authority is not about justice, fairness or peace: it is only about obeying those with authority and nothing else.
For all the talk of "unity" coming from politicians, they rely on the people voting against each other by voting for them. The government needs people to believe that society can't be unified without it, so that it has an excuse to force everyone to follow its commands. This is why politicians don't talk about "coming together" and all the other rosy, feel-good rhetoric until after they win. They want the people to be divided on "issues" that wouldn't even be issues if no one thought that one side's solution has to be imposed on everyone else. This mentality makes people fear being oppressed by an opposing group, so they figure they have to vote for their side to get their way, becoming the oppressors themselves instead.
The end result of an election is always the voters losing and the politicians winning, as the politicians become the rulers and the voters become the subjects. In other words, voters are nothing but pawns for those who want to dominate them.
The true solution is for people to stop imagining that "government" and "authority" have to be obeyed, as there is no obligation to obey those in power just because they demand it. They might have the ability to force people to comply, but that doesn't give them the right to do so. If people stopped voting and wasting their time, energy and resources into politics, the government would fade away into irrelevance.
Real unity should be people cooperating and organizing together voluntarily and peacefully as equals, not supporting a violent institution.