It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Ungovernable

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 22 2019 @ 12:46 PM
I was reading articles on the world-wide riots and I was shocked to see about half take a narrative which was against the protesters. No, I am not going to dig up all of the articles, go look for them if you’re curious. I will link one of the milder articles, now I don't know this publication and I don't care because it is not the legitimacy of the source, but instead the thoughts contained therein which finally sparked my reflection. The one with the headline read:

"From Iran to Hong Kong, The World is Becoming Ungovernable."

The article stated that there will be ‘police rule’ or ‘mob rule’ and that anarchy seems preferable to the protesters over a tighter regime. All I could think of was “Duh. If they were content with the authority, they wouldn’t be protesting.”

The article didn’t delve into the legitimacy of the protester’s complaints. It did a decent job of telling why some of the protests were starting, but overall had a tone of ‘dread’ that the masses were (and how dare they) uprising against established centralized governments and demanding (and how dare they) change.

I’m reminded of an Orwell Quote:

“If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever.”

I am reminded of the Ivory Tower analogy, where the elites govern from a parenting standpoint of “We know what’s best for you.”. I am reminded of how good we have it in North America and how our grievances here do not compare to the issues we see elsewhere in the world.

I am forced to reflect on thoughts of being ungovernable. It is not that I think the world is becoming ‘ungovernable’, I think it is that the world has finally said ‘enough’. There’s a difference. Should the government be one that is person-centric, liberty-centric, for, of, and by the people we would not be seeing these protests. We’ve lost sight of this somewhere. I am not thinking of these as ‘protests’ anymore, but revolutions. Revolution. That is a scary word that isn’t being published in the same frequency as ‘anarchy’, ‘mob-rule’, and ‘discourse’.

“The dominant phenomenon in world politics during 2018 was a regression of liberal democracy and the spread and strengthening of right-wing nationalist regimes.”

When I read that, it (to me) sounded as if the author was correlating the shift to nationalism as a cause for the protests – however we did not see a rise in nationalism or right-wing politics in the areas in active rebellion. I think this is a false equivalency. I think we saw a shift to right-wing nationalism as a response (in some areas) of people going ‘enough’ and trying an alternative route from the decades long march toward globalism and complete centralization of world-wide governance. I see the shift toward nationalism as a result of the same cause quoted later in the article:

“The political situation in most of the countries where protest has erupted has in common is the helplessness of the central government. “

Helplessness. Loss of autonomy. Side-observation.

“Personal autonomy is the capacity to decide for oneself and pursue a course of action in one's life, often regardless of any particular moral content. Political autonomy is the property of having one's decisions respected, honored, and heeded within a political context.”

The loss of autonomy may be one of the worst things a human can experience. I think it is overlooked. When studying assisted-suicide and assisted-suicide laws we see a trend of people who have either medically lost autonomy, or people who -fear- losing autonomy. This is relevant because people would rather DIE than even endure the FEAR of loss of autonomy (which hasn’t even occurred yet). This is not to say people want to strike it out on their own always. People also want to be led. People enjoy following and mutual benefit, as so long as they make the choice to follow.

Autonomy. Leadership. Side-observation.

“Leadership requires two things, followers and a destination/goal/objective. Followers can only be motivated by inspiration or fear. Everything else is not leadership but management. People hate being managed. People want to be led, where someone has a voice and tells them why they are doing what they are doing, how they will do it, and what the result will be. When we lose sight of inspirational leadership we are led by fear, we lose self-governance. We stop growing and start dying.” – Paraphrased from Simon Sinek.

Manipulation is a fear tactic of leadership.
Authenticity is an inspiration tactic of leadership.

Manipulation. Authenticity. Side-observation.

We see divides in the political arena when we, as individuals and groups, determine one side is manipulative and the other is authentic. When thinking of the right/left dynamic in the United States we see one side think their camp is authentic and the other is manipulative.

Final side-observation. Belief and conviction.

“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” – Attributed to Mark Twain.

Even when presented with truth, facts, and evidence the people fooled will often reject, ignore, and excuse their previous stances. This is a typical human response. We see people double-down in these situations. We see it in day-to-day arguments. We see it in almost every political divide in the United States. We don’t want to be taken advantage of, we don’t want our neighbors to be taken advantage of, and we don’t want to admit when we’ve been taken advantage of.


What a loaded word. What a horrible word. A word used by people leading by fear, afraid to lose their power structures.



posted on Nov, 22 2019 @ 01:27 PM
I remember 1968. A year of sorrow in the USA and turmoil throughout most of the world.
Student riots in Mexico, numerous dead (as I recall).
Riots in Poland against current leaders (Dubcek-Svobada was the chant in the street).
China was full blown Mao induced Cultural Revolution, conveniently forgotten post-Tiananman (sp?) Square.

We had our own student riots protesting Vietnam, and other things... Remember the Church Committee back in '75 exposed all the COINTELpro, infiltration by the FBI that was happening within student groups, MLK & black panthers...

Back then it was as today - depending upon region, the propaganda was thick about one side's cause or the other.
I'm sure the Eastern Bloc didn't get fed the idea that the students (only) were in rebellion in Europe.
Just as Americans were fed it was the hippies wanting to take over the country with all this protesting and rioting.

It does look like this, now is a pivotal time, just as '68 seemed to be at the time.
Only time will tell.


edit on 2019-11-22 by ganjoa because: no n in & divot on the pivot

posted on Nov, 22 2019 @ 02:06 PM
Governance only works by consent to compromise; where there is no compromise, there can be no government.

In the past, consent was far easier to obtain, largely because compromise was recognized as the most viable political option. Political strength has always been the product of greater numbers working toward a desired goal, and therefore more people were willing to prioritize their personal desires in accordance to a group that most nearly, in their estimation, reflected desired prioritized goals.

More often than not, exact matches where impossible to identify, and people were forced to compromise their personal goal priorities in order to bond with the greatest number of “sufficiently (if not “exactly”) like-minded individuals to garner political significance.

As the old song advised;

”...If you can’t be with the one you Love, Love the one you’re with...”

Our instantly and continuously connected, world-wide society now makes it possible to Always “be” with the one(s) we love, in the sense that we individually now have much greater access to others who, with much greater precision, match our personal goal priorities.

We no longer feel the need to compromise our beliefs to “best fit” the party, we can now alloy a party of people who reflect our beliefs with near perfection by drawing from a world-wide pool of possibilities.

And since compromise is essentially no longer required, it is rejected, making “government”, as it was once understood, virtually impossible.

Improvements and advances in communications have, in short, and quite to the contrary of what was predicted, made government unworkable.

posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 12:06 PM
So then these choice of words are an attempt to control the world narrative. No one needs to know that these protests and mobs are actually moves of revolution. The mass of Earth's people waking up and seeking truths must be "managed".
Good luck.
Sometimes when I close my eyes I can see the universe so...good luck managing THAT.

posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 02:53 PM
a reply to: KaDeCo

King said. “I think that we’ve got to see that a riot is the language of the unheard. And, what is it that America has failed to hear?

Your post was most interesting and well thought out. I did read the Harretz article and found it interesting but a couple of hundred words hardly does the subject justice and your commentary was a wonderful addition.

I’ll start by quoting the article myself,

The dominant phenomenon in world politics during 2018 was a regression of liberal democracy and the spread and strengthening of right-wing nationalist regimes.

That trend continued in 2019, but toward the end of the year a different political phenomenon, equally significant, is discernible: a worldwide wave of protest, the most extensive since the start of the decade. The opening volley was the so-called yellow vests movement in France, which has just marked its first anniversary with a new display of blocking roads and smashing shop windows.

I think it is that the world has finally said ‘enough’. There’s a difference. Should the government be one that is person-centric, liberty-centric, for, of, and by the people we would not be seeing these protests.

Quote from your OP.

Regarding the helplessness of central governments.

Central governments are helpless at helping the public (or in economic terms the proletariat or working class) primarily because after WWII they became every more an enforcement arm for Big Capital (Capitalist and/or Bourgeoisie).

That is where we stand today. In the past the people had some say in central government because civil servants (government) were primarily working people with a sense of duty to the people not sycophants seeking entry into the Capitalist Class.

I think the above dynamic leads to your ‘enough’ from people and that Nationalism is a tool that has always been used to encourage the ‘masses’ to get behind whatever ‘programme’ is being proposed.

Nationalism is a distraction from real issues of import and a means of directing the ire of the populous unto ‘the other’.

I am not familiar with Simon Sinek and so can’t comment on his ideas in any useful manner.

However, my father was a successful leader throughout his life (oldest child of a large farming family, career military, and management consultant) and his rule of thumb was

“Never ask anyone to do something that you wouldn’t do yourself.”

I also think “to inspire” others (not followers – too personality centric for me.) requires a shared VISION. Not a goal, not the tactics involved, but a guidepost a path, often convoluted. A VISION differs from a GOAL which has a definite end point or result. A VISION is opened ended and ongoing.

The VISION of life getting better for everyone has been lost.

People willingly collaborate with Leaders who:

1) Authentically share their VISION.
2) Listen to those they are leading.

posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 03:22 PM
a reply to: KaDeCo

I am reminded of the Ivory Tower analogy, where the elites govern from a parenting standpoint of “We know what’s best for you.”. I am reminded of how good we have it in North America and how our grievances here do not compare to the issues we see elsewhere in the world

You mean how good we have it NOW don't you? Cause four years ago as
I recall nothing looked good in America. And Obama's dismal claims of
jobs being gone from america forever? Well we sure see how that turned
out. And I submit to you that if Hillary would have stole the oval office
we would've had grievances far greater than any across the world.

Anyone with eyes can see that's what has the liberals and their media
popping blood vessels. The american people saw a chance to steer
themselves away from what they saw coming, in the current POTUS.

Thank God for deplorable's.

posted on Nov, 23 2019 @ 04:19 PM
a reply to: KaDeCo

Well, i think to a large degree what the articles are saying is correct.. a large part of the world, if not all of us are becoming ungovernable... the word itself it not so bad... what it represents is... think about it... around the world you are seeing many places where people ARE no longer allowing themselves to be governed... how do you really know this to be true..

well that is easy... even in places where the people are given what they want it is not enough lol.. there are places where it is a constant state of turmoil no matter what... it is the status quote...

people world wide are resorting to the belief that they should just be allowed to do what ever the heck they want and when they want to do it lol...sadly, we must be governed... we must have rules... otherwise we have proven throughout man's history we just kill each other and don't survive...

People today are not satisfied with the rules they are being governed with and in some cases like hong kong they are right to do so... but honestly, what we are seeing world wide today is more about anarchy than being governed. At some point we as people of the world have to understand that tearing and burning down your own country in the name of change is not the right way lol... seriously.... rules, governing, will always be necessary, simple fact...

top topics


log in