Analyzing the Social and Political Disintegration of a System that Appears to Have Failed

The system that prevails today has failed miserably. Instead of rewarding merit, work, and morality, it gives precedence to people who know how to talk, rather than to those who know how to act. The rhetorical demagogues, the pseudo-elected of the political scene, rise to power thanks to their ability to manipulate the masses, instead of being real leaders with vision and principles. This system is synonymous with corruption, transaction, and plutocracy, where power is rented, bought, and sold, and morality is set aside for the sake of profit and profit alone.

The Power of the Pseudo-Elected

In today’s political model, power does not belong to those who deserve to exercise it, but to those who can persuade, flatter, or deceive the public. Politicians are no longer leaders, but demagogues who constantly promise incredible things (e.g. “there is money” and “100,000 jobs”) without having the intention or ability to fulfill them. Public accountability has disappeared: everyone governs, but no one is responsible. When institutions function, they serve their own interests, not the needs of citizens, and the rest of the time they remain inactive.

In such a sick environment, anarchy, like a persistent weed, sprouts in everyday life. Public services operate according to the mood of workers, not based on the needs of society. Strikes, demonstrations and conflicts are permanent phenomena, signs of a society that is disintegrating from within. The streets become battlefields, trust in institutions collapses and social cohesion weakens. These phenomena will not be cured by the system. To a large extent, it causes them and serves them as long as they keep social power mistakenly involved in useless and misguided conflicts. On the part of the system, there is only the diligence to limit these disturbances to a degree that they do not really threaten its power.

In principle, the parliamentary system is supposed to ensure the well-being of citizens. However, practice reveals that this system has made citizens its first victims. Instead of well-being, there is cynical social inequality. Instead of justice, we experience a capricious impunity. Instead of progress, degenerative stagnation prevails. Reality proves that democracy, as practiced today, has degenerated into an empty vessel devoid of substance.

The Price of Social Dissolution

The theory of this system promises that governance under it brings happy societies. However, practice paints a different picture. The biggest victim of this situation is not only the desired political-economic progress, but the social fabric itself. Citizens live in a climate of uncertainty, without hope for a better tomorrow. As a result, they do not believe in the social vision and sabotage it even unconsciously. Corruption has eroded every level of public life, from politics and the economy, to the protection of the country. Plutocracy continues to dominate indifferently, while ordinary people struggle to survive, regardless of which of the supposed saviors is in power.

This system has proven to be stupid, inadequate and immoral. There is a need for a radical revision of the “sub-values” that govern and shape it.

Society needs to return to ethical foundations, that is, to a model where responsibility and action unquestionably precede rhetoric and demagogy. Where accountability will be a duty. Only in this way can a real state emerge, where citizens will live essentially united and genuinely happy and not victims, food for a voracious and seemingly all-powerful but actually weak and sick system.

About the author

The Liberal Globe is an independent online magazine that provides carefully selected varieties of stories. Our authoritative insight opinions, analyses, researches are reflected in the sections which are both thematic and geographical. We do not attach ourselves to any political party. Our political agenda is liberal in the classical sense. We continue to advocate bold policies in favour of individual freedoms, even if that means we must oppose the will and the majority view, even if these positions that we express may be unpleasant and unbearable for the majority.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *