To me it has always seemed that governments are always a few steps behind the ideas and ideologies of their people, which creates a disconnect that can often lead to discontent and worse.

Detrimental effects:

When a population is at a disagreement with its government in multiple important areas the majority of the population seem to split into three thought processes;

• To try and push change
• To ignore politics
• To give up

This then further divides the population into more sub groups, as the population is already split between political alignments but then it gets split into groups within those groups and a similar mold fits for the government.

This leaves us with the people fighting each other and the government and the government fighting each other and the people, which leaves little room for any change to be made so ideas take longer to be planned out and put into place.

Why governments are behind:

I see governments as always being behind for two main reasons, firstly society changing so fast and secondly people changing slowly.

Society

I see society as fast evolving because anyone can have impactful ideas or creations. Young people have the opportunity to impact society on a regular basis through various forms, one being art, for example music can be a big impact on people and new music is more regularly released by young people, and just due to the fact that young people are having to learn who they are so they try out many different ideas which can lead to new tech being made or social platforms and so on.

All of these things are big parts of what lead society. Change and innovation is always waiting to happen as people have new ideas every day that can be worked on as soon as they are even partly thought up.

You also don't need to have tons of experience to think of a good idea and you don't need social or political status to start working on an idea, though without status an idea can be harder to put forward.

Government

I see governments as slowly evolving because it is very hard to be listened to as a young person. The people that run governments are generally old because you have to have years upon years of experience in government and politics to get to a position of influence.

This means, for example, if someone has an idea for change rather than just being able to do their best to push said idea they will have to go through years of work before they get to a position where the idea becomes valid by which point the idea could know longer be valid.

Then because the world is so fast moving if you try to take a valid idea through government by the time you get there the ecosystem of the society could have moved so far that they have either moved past that idea or found an alternate route.

Also people generally view the world as they did when they were young. People seem to have a fixed view of the world that generally gets formed during the time people are experiencing the most and going out and doing the most, and in most cases this is during peoples younger years. This means when they get into power they view the world as it was when they were young and try and push changes that fit that world, however because society moves so fast the world of peoples youth will know longer exist in their latter years.

How to make a change?

Through this blog I may have come across as digging at older generations which is not my aim, I am trying to put forward that I think for change to happen young people need to have more of a say in government.

When I say young people I also don't mean teenagers, more people from the ages of say 20-35. I think if young people were able to advise and work more closely with the senior members of governments it could help to make society and governments advance at a more similar level.
Which would also lessen many of the negative affects of this divide between society and governments.

If more young people could have their say heard in government it would help to give people in power a better image of what the world appears to be today, at least through that young persons eyes. I think adding a new or different perspective can always be helpful to making change even if it that perspective gives direct or indirect insight.

For example, even if the young persons perspective is deemed to be wrong it can still help to understand more perspectives of more people so that when a change is put forward by the government it can be portrayed in a way that more people may be willing to take on board.

For all I know by the time I am 50+ an idea like this could be completely invalid to society and governments at said time, which is sadly or possible a happy emphasis on everything I mentioned prior. Do you agree with my thoughts? or do you take a different standpoint? Comment your thoughts, upvote if you enjoyed and follow for more.