Maybe you're right, but politicians are there because people voted for them. Why vote for them if they are not satisfied and if their demands are not satisfied? What I mean, in fact ... This political system of governing society has been implemented for hundreds of years, is consolidated and cannot be replaced suddenly. Except for some cataclysms or world wars, but I don't think it would be any better after these events. The transition to a different society, I think, is slow and long-lasting, much slower than technological and social progress. The proof is that although the masses could change politicians by voting, they are not doing so now. Those who are manifesting now, who are visible and growing in number, thanks to social networks, are still heterogeneous and without a clear ideology (just claiming total freedom is not enough and can never happen). These people are easily influenced by charismatic leaders who have never been well-intentioned in history. I apologize because in my comments I bring arguments against maybe your vision for a decentralized future, I don't do it for the pleasure of denying, I do it because that's how I think things are going and because no one seems to have other ideas. , arguments. When everyone agrees on one thing, they come to believe that it is the ultimate truth and may later have unpleasant surprises.

Posted Using LeoFinance ^Beta