Many people see the evils in the world created by Governments, but did anyone ask himself the question, how it all came to be, from where it originates?

I have a theory on that, a pretty solid one, that is almost self evident. It's not hard to realize, you just have to study history, way back from the origins.

The Original Conflict (Individual under Family)

Humanity originated as a Familial animal, basically from monkeys. Some of these traits are self-evident, we are hairy, we look similar to monkeys and we, sometimes, behave similarly.

In the beginning there were only few humans living on the planet, and it's hard to draw the line between human and monkey, because there wasn't really a point when the human just detached himself from the monkey habitat, it was a long process of evolution over millions of years.

But let's just say that in the beginning of the Homo Erectus species, whenever that was, from where we mostly originate from, there were few humans living on the Planet, who were hunter gatherers for the most part.

There was no permanent governance structure, people lived with their Family and/or extended Family. They lived together, they hunted together, they worked together. And it was an efficient society, since people lived with their blood relatives, so loyalty was not a problem, and people can usually trust and work together better with Family member than with strangers, especially in a dangerous environment, where you have to trust these people with your life.

So the Family was the de-facto Government. Usually the oldest male was the leader, who was either the father, or in the case of joint or extended Families, the strongest man. And keep in mind that the average life expectancy was 30 at this time so the "oldest male" can still be a muscular, strong older alpha male in his 40s or early 50s, still fit enough to subjugate the rest of the Family with physical violence.

It was a Family Government that was built on blood relation, Family loyalty, and physical violence punishment for disobedience. And we still see remnants of this in present domestic violence cases (husband beats wife, mother spanks children,etc).

This model had 1 weakness though, is that "if the ruler was wrong" then you could not challenge or criticize him because you would get punished. So the ruler would easily make bad decisions and drive his Family into extinction because there was nobody to oppose him, because everyone feared him.

A society where the decision makers have no opposition is obviously an unstable one, and the more wrong they are, the more they double down on their stupidity. Basically they are fighting reality, and for that you need to escalate violence, because you need to increase the violence to sustain an unsustainable system.

Tribe ( Family under Tribe)

As the population of Earth increased, more and more Families appeared, and while the Individual was still under the subjugation of his Family, the Family itself started expanding. Marriages happened between multiple Families, forming alliances, forming Tribes.

This is when agriculture was invented and humans gave up their nomadic lifestyle, settling down, forming property systems and commerce between other Tribes.

Keep in mind that the conflicts inside the Family weren't resolved, they just got overruled by a higher entity, the Tribe. So whenever the Family leader made some bad decisions, the tribal council or similar authority overruled him.

The alpha male remained the leader of his Family, but the tribal council and the tribal elders became an authority above him, overruling him when necessary, with the might of the entire Tribe and it's warriors.

The City-State ( Tribe under the State)

As more and more Tribes came together they started fighting with eachother, and forming alliances with eachother. They needed a larger land in order to perform the agriculture, and they had to defend that land. So the State was born. Which comes from the word "estate", basically the land that the Tribes owned.

They were originally City-States, formed by the alliances between multiple Tribes, where 1 Family leader, which was 1 leader of the Tribe, was made king, of the entire City State, and to rule over it with all it's might.

The kingship was inherited through blood, as we know, so the original bloodlines can be traced back to the "alliance pact" that the Tribes took, so that it's authority is derived from this event.

So we have big Families with alpha males dominating over them, we have an alpha male that was a local Tribe leader, and we have a king that was the leader of the alliance of the Tribes, the newly formed City State.

The Roman Kingdom was created exactly like this, formed of 3 Tribes, who created 1 king: Romulus, to rule over the city of Rome.

Rome was a prime example of the inner conflicts between Families (Julii and Brutii) and Tribes, so was we can see the original conflict never went away, it was just magnified under the new authority models.

The Kingdom ( States under the Kingdom)

The later parts of antiquity and the middle ages were characterized by wars and alliances between city-States, forming Kingdoms and empires together.

The hierarchy was still the same: Individual->Family->Tribe->City State->Kingdom.

Although as we go up in hierarchy, the lower echelons became less and less significant. The Individual didn't mattered anymore, and some poorer Families have also been worthless. Only the prestigious Tribes and their leaders became the new nobles in the Kingdom, and the ruling Family.

Feudalism can be characterized by a total dominance of the upper 3 layers of Government, and 0 rights to the elements below.

So the inner Family conflicts, haven't been resolved, you just delegated them to higher authorities, so that the King or the local Noble will have the final say over your issue, and you will have 0 power.

The Nation State ( Kingdoms under the Nation)

In the 1700's, the Nation State emerged, as the highest authority that was either an alliance between multiple lower Kingdoms, or was built on a newly invented "Democratic model". Regardless the hierarchy was still there. Although with some shifts.

The Tribe and City State layers have became less influential, because the Tribes were now unified under the construct of the Nation, and the City States were centrally managed from a Capital, so their influence was dwindling.

The new model was: Individual->Family->Nation

The Superstate ( Nations under the Superstates)

The first Superstate is the USA, where multiple Nations have formed a union. Then there was the Soviet Union, and other regional blocks. And of course the European Union.

However in the 21 century, the Family has already lost it's influence, because of the "single mom" phenomena, and the fact that kids from 3 years old up to 26 years are prisoners of the State in all sorts of "education" facilities.

So the Family has lost it's power, but we have a new Government above the Nation, that is these Superstates.

The current model is: Individual->Nation->Superstate

---

Now as you have seen, the fundamental problem is never resolved. Humans just keep creating new bureaucracies, and new layers of Government, one upon the other. With the formation of the EU, Individuals have 0 rights left, they are just welfare slaves or wage slaves.

Nobody has any freedoms left, and even in the anti-EU movements, nobody wants to give Individual's rights back, but Nation's rights. Everyone wants National sovereignty, but nobody wants Individual sovereignty. Why?

As you can see the Individual has no rights anymore, it has been taken away from him over the course of the past 1 million years, simply because humans could not resolve the fundamental conflict.

WHAT IS THE FUNDAMENTAL CONFLICT?

The fundamental conflict is the problem that humans can't get along. So they have to form Families, Tribes, States, Nations, Superstates, and Global Government, in order to solve a problem, that has to be solved on the Individual level.

If 2 people can't get along, what makes you think that 2 Superstates can get along? And what makes you think that a Global Government will be a good idea?

You see, if the conflict is not resolved on the Individual level. Then all you do, is to kick the can down the road, and escalate the conflict by escalating the violence.

And since the violence has reached it's tipping point: NUCLEAR WEAPONS, the next conflict will be the end of humanity.

Because humans could not resolve the conflict on the Individual level, they have just escalated the violence, until the entire species will go extinct with it.

---

Sources:
https://pixabay.com

---

Upvote, ReSteem &