What if we could establish a new system of governance that worked but it is not accepted internationally?

Hi Everyone,

The economic, social, and political systems in our countries are failing the people. These systems are designed to benefit the people running them. The vast majority of the citizens have no say in how these operate or even who runs them. They are self-perpetuating by design, this makes them incredibly difficult to break. I have discussed how these systems work in numerous posts such as Raise your hand if you live in a Democracy, Could democracy succeed if it was given a chance?, Centralisation vs. Decentralisation, Political Systems and Freedom and The Establishment.

Ideally, we want these systems to gradually break down as people apply pressure to those in Government to make reforms to the system to enable the people to take back control. In my post, What would get me to the ballot box?, I discuss the changes I believe necessary before we can have an opportunity to create a system that enables self-rule and freedom. Gradual change is unlikely; I believe Governments would prefer complete collapse than concede any significant ground to their people. This collapse is likely to occur when people can no longer tolerate the existing leaders and the existing systems. This collapse is likely to be rapid and dramatic.

New systems will form rapidly or at least it will appear that way. These systems could be a huge improvement over the previous systems or they could be even worse (e.g. The Great Reset). The direction we take will depend on how change is driven and who drives it. I have written two posts approximately a year apart. In my post, A Possible Grim Reality, I present the negative outcomes of change and in my post, Bright Future out of Chaos I present the possibility of a brighter future from change. For both scenarios, I predict change will come at a significant cost.

In this post, I want to assume a scenario where we are able to break the old system and replace it with one that enables people to be free. Where nobody has complete control over decisions. Where leadership is situational and supported by people most affected by problems and their proposed solutions. I discuss a version of this type of system in the context of blockchain technology in my posts The Blockchain Economy, Blockchain Government – Part 1: Breaking Down the Existing System, and Blockchain Government – Part 2: Leadership from the Blockchain.

In this post, I want to discuss what could happen if only a few or even just one country was able to break the existing Establishment system. Would other countries (i.e. Governments) be accepting of such as a radical break from the system or would they attempt to punish the people in this new system or even attempt to destroy them and it?

External Interference

Society has become global. Every country in the world is dependent on other countries to some extent. They either lack particular resources, goods, expertise, technology, etc. (i.e. they import them) or they rely on revenue from other countries by selling them (i.e. exports). This interdependence enables countries to influence each other. The largest, wealthiest, and most powerful countries have the potential to exert the most influence. These would be the USA, China, and the European Union Bloc (not a country but in practice a de facto country). Of these three, the USA is the most likely to intervene in the running of other countries. They have a long history of doing so.

If the USA remains entrenched in an Establishment controlled system, they are highly likely to oppose any new governance systems. They will see them as a threat to their dominance (e.g. similar to how China is considered a threat but for different reasons). If governance has become decentralised, they will have no direct method of controlling these new systems. Therefore, they will need these new systems to fail and for those in the new systems to turn against them. If these systems are successful, the US Establishment would be in great danger of being replaced. US citizens are likely to want to adopt the new systems or create similar systems that suit them even better. The Establishment will lose their grip on power. The powerful few will always be vulnerable to a united far larger majority.

The US Establishment have many ways of controlling and manipulating other countries. They have military bases located across the world. They use NATO to control other countries militaries (30 countries in NATO) and use other militaries as fodder when needed (e.g. Ukraine). They have a powerful media presence in both news and entertainment (e.g. most watched news networks, TV series, and movies around the world). They sanction countries with regimes that are not compliant with their wishes (e.g. Syria and Iran). They enable revolutions in countries they desire regime change (e.g. colour revolutions).

US Military Bases around the world

In 2019, the USA had around 600 overseas military bases scattered across the planet (Wikipedia). They have a military presence in 40% of world’s countries (Smithsomnian 2019). Figure 1 shows the countries with at least one military base and Figure 2 shows countries with at least some US military presence.

Figure 1: Map of US Military Bases (2019)

Source: Wikipedia

Figure 2: Map of US Military Presence (2020)

Source: Teddyterminal Reddit Account

To establish this many military bases and to achieve this level of presence, indicates that the US has considerable influence over these hosting countries. The US has extended their military presence and dominance further with the growth of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO). NATO’s supposed purpose was for mutual protection against possible attacks from Germany and the Soviet Union. Germany joined NATO in 1955 and the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991 (Wikipedia). Instead of contracting or dissolving, NATO expanded by adding another 14 countries. All of these countries are from Europe. Most of these members brought NATO closer to Russia and some of these countries were formerly part of the Soviet Union (AP News). The US and NATO military presence can be used to intimidate countries and can be used as a threat against them.

The risk to the US military is reduced as they have countries to fight on their behalf. The most recent example is the use of Ukraine to fight Russia. According to Sergey Karaganov (former adviser to Russian President Vladimir Putin), Ukranians are being used as cannon fodder in the war (Al Jazeera). This opinion is consistent with an allegedly leaked Rand document proposing the provocation of a war in Ukraine, the initially claimed high death toll of 100,000 Ukrainian troops by Ursula von der Leyen (President of the European Commission) (Newsweek), the claim from a top (unnamed) Ukrainian official that as many as 1,000 Ukrainian soldiers are killed or wounded each day (Axios), and reported information allegedly from Israeli intelligence (Mossad) that 157,000 Ukrainian soldiers have been killed in action as of January 2023; by comparison they reported that 18,480 Russian soldiers have been killed (BRICS Information Portal and originally reported in Turkish in Hurseda Haber).

Propaganda Power

The US Establishment are able to influence people across the world through news channels, TV shows, movies, search engines, and social media. The US has 3 of the top 5 most watched News Channels in the world. The other two are British (Trendrr).

Most Watched News Channels

Source: Trendrr

The top 10 highest grossing movies in international box offices (excludes US box office figures) are made by US companies. The most watched TV shows are made by US companies.

Highest Grossing Movies Internationally

Source: The Numbers

Most Watched TV Shows

Source: IMDB

US based social media companies are the largest in the world. In 2023, the top four social media platforms by users were all US based, the next two were based in China. See Figure 3

Figure 3: Number of Active Users on Largest Social Media Platforms (in Millions)

Source: Statista

The US based company, Google, have almost a complete global monopoly for search engines. As of 2022, they had a market share of over 92% (Oberlo).

The US Establishment has immense control over information through news channels and ideology through television and movies. They have immense control on the access of information through social media and search engines. This can and is used to influence people around the world to follow and even comply with US and western portrayed values and ideals.

The US Establishment can exert even more control through their many large multinational companies. Most of the world’s largest companies (8 of the top 10 by market cap) are US based (Companies Market Cap). They can spread their values and ideology through marketing and brand presence.

Trade and Sanctions

Source for US Trade Data: OEC World

The US is a large high income country. They trade with many countries around the world and in high volumes. Receiving sanctions from the US is a major blow to any economy. It is a blow because of the loss of trade with the US and in many cases it leads to loss of trade with many of the US’s allies such as the EU or even more countries through the UN. Figure 4 contains US sanctions as of 2022 and Figure 5 contains US, EU, and UN sanctions as of 2017.

Figure 4: US Sanctions (2022)

Source: Wikipedia

Figure 5: US, EU, and UN Sanctions (2017)

Source: DW

Sanctions hurt the citizens of the sanctioned countries and in some cases the sanctioning countries as well. People are being deprived of potentially essential goods and services and they are being deprived of earning income from the sale of their goods and services. Many of the sanctioned countries are poor. The sanctions are sinking them into further poverty.

Colour Revolutions

Source: Lapham’s Quarterly

Colour revolutions are uprisings that lead to a change in Government or a strong threat of change in Government. They are referred to as colour revolutions because they are named after a colour linked to the uprising, see the figure above for examples.

The US Establishment most likely have played a role in many of these colour revolutions. They are suspected for several reasons. Many of the uprisings align with US objectives. Anti-US Governments and leaders are replaced with pro-US Governments and leaders. Western nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) are involved in funding opposition parties and groups in countries that have leadership unfavourable to the US Establishment (Global Times).

The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) plays a leading role in funding overseas organisations that have democratic goals (i.e. goals that align with US objectives). They even support exiled opposition that meets their definition of democratic goals (NED). They target countries that they consider authoritarian. They focus attention on the elections of new developing democracies to help facilitate what they define as free and fair elections (NED). Many colour revolutions begin with accusations of bias and unfair elections (Wikipedia). NED also works with overseas activists and media (NED). This provides them with opportunity to fund and spread misinformation that can be used to cause and spread discontent that could eventually lead to an uprising. According to the Wall Street Journal, the US Government and NGOs supported the Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan with funding and dissemination of information.

The countries that have experienced colour revolutions have not thrived afterwards. Ukraine has had two colour revolutions in 2004 (Orange Revolution) and 2014 (Revolution of Dignity) (Strategic Culture Foundation). In 2021, their GDP per capita has barely improved since 2004 and was below what it was when they were part of the Soviet Union in the 1980s. They are ranked as having one of the most corrupt Governments in Europe (Trading Economics).

Kyrgyzstan had a colour revolution (Tulip Revolution) in 2005 and another one (Melon Revolution) in 2010 (Wikipedia). Since then, corruption, based on Transparency International criteria, has substantially worsened (Trading Economics). In 2017, their GDP per capita ranked 148 out of 190 countries (Worldometer).

Iraq had a colour revolution in 2005 (Wikipedia). Since then corruption has become and remained very high. It has ranked consistently as one of the most corrupt countries in the world; see Figure 6. Iraq has experienced mostly slow economic growth since the revolution (Worldometer).

Figure 6 Corruption Index Ranking Iraq (2003 – 2022)

Source: Trading Economics

Georgia had a colour revolution (Rose Revolution) in 2003 (Wikipedia). Since then, corruption has decreased and GDP per capita has increased substantially. However, Georgia does not rank in the top 100 countries for GDP per capita (Worldometer). Since the revolution, Georgia has had consistently high unemployment (permanently above 15%) and high inflation (often above 5%). The uprising may have benefited the wealthier people but not the working class.

There do not appear to be any countries that have substantially benefited from colour revolutions. Most remain corrupt or become more corrupt. None of these countries rank highly on any of the democracy metrics (Economist Intelligence).

The EU punishing the UK over Brexit

The US Establishment are not the only ones to exert themselves on countries if they do not bend to their demands. The EU likes to exert power and influence over its member nations. For example, Hungary has been threatened by the EU (e.g. remove funding or restrict voting rights) on several occasions for not meeting their standards (BBC and France 24).

Northern Ireland Protocol

---

The biggest insult to the EU was the UK leaving the bloc (i.e. Brexit). In 2016, the UK had a referendum to leave the EU. In early 2021, the UK formally left the EU. Brexit was most likely not the outcome the European or the UK Establishment wanted. The UK Establishment made use of Brexit to divide the country. They dragged debates out for over three years. Many in parliament tried to stop Brexit happening. In the meantime, two Prime Ministers resigned (David Cameron and Theresa May) because they would not deliver Brexit. Brexit was being attacked from both European and UK Establishments. The process was designed to make leaving the EU as difficult as possible. Eventually, in 2020, an arguably unnecessary Withdrawal Agreement was signed by the UK Government and EU. Part of the Withdrawal Agreement was the Northern Ireland Protocol. This treaty created a trade barrier between Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

The impingement to trade was claimed to be minor; only goods with a high risk of crossing from Great Britain into Northern Ireland and then onto Republic of Ireland would be checked; this should be very few goods. Once implemented, the EU took an incredibly hard stance. The excessive amount of paperwork resulted in long delays and some goods were not allowed to cross into Northern Ireland. It was estimated that 20% of all EU checks were occurring at the Northern Ireland-Great Britain (Irish) sea border (Belfast Telegraph).

The EU have taken a strong stance on maintaining these stringent checks within the UK and will not tolerant their removal (DW). A foreign power is controlling the internal trade in the UK. On top of that, Northern Ireland are still subject to many EU laws as well as the European Court of Justice (Roch Dunin-Wasowicz London School of Economics 2019). In 2022, the Government in Northern Ireland collapsed when the Democratic Unionist Party pulled out of the power sharing agreement over the Northern Protocol (Express).

Illegal English Channel Crossings

---

Since the signing of the Withdrawal Agreement, the number of illegal channel crossings from France (EU country) has increased dramatically. See Figure 7.

Figure 7: English Channel Migrant Crossings (2019 – 2021)

Source: BBC

In 2022, this trend continued with 45,000 people crossing the channel (Standard). The sudden surge in illegal crossings and Brexit are not a coincidence. Actions by both French and British authorities could be causing this huge increase in numbers. According to a Daily Mail report, based on maritime radio conversations, the French Navy are guiding migrant boats to mid-channel where British authorities transfer them into boats to bring them over to Dover. The influx of these migrants are causing both a financial and logistical burden to the UK (The Sun).

The UK economy has struggled in recent years because of bad Covid-19 policy and sanctions imposed on Russia. These have triggered the UK’s high inflation and low growth (arguably there are other underlying factors that have caused the UK to struggle; see my post Cost of Living Crisis – A Collection of Symptoms caused by Serious Long-term Political Failure).

The UK Government has also done very little to unburden themselves of previous EU regulations and laws. The current UK economic struggles are being blamed on Brexit by the pro-EU media (For example, CNN). Despite, the hurdles the EU have attempted to place on the UK, after a very short adjustment period, trade between the UK and EU has continued to increase even after Brexit. See Figure 8 below.

Figure 8: UK and EU Trade

Source: Statista

The EU gain very little economically from the problems they are causing in Northern Ireland or if they are facilitating the inflow of illegal migrants across the channel. Their objectives are to punish the UK people for wanting to leave the EU. UK were one of the largest and richest countries in EU. The EU was stronger with them in it. They may hope that if they cause enough problems for the UK, people will change their minds and demand the UK Government to apply for EU membership or at least re-join their single market. Punishing the UK also sends a strong message to other countries that might want to leave the UK. If the UK struggle outside the EU, other smaller countries would struggle even more.

There is Hope

Despite the likelihood of strong resistance that any country would face if they broke away from the Establishment systems, I remain optimistic. The people of the US have proven to be pioneers in advocating freedom and free speech. I believe it is likely that the US people will be at the forefront of taking back their freedom from the Establishment.

In 2016, when they voted in Donald Trump as their president, they demonstrated that they no longer supported or wanted Establishment rule. Even though mainstream media constantly criticized and berated Donald Trump and actively promoted the Democrats, Donald Trump obtained even more votes in his 2020 Presidential campaign than he did in 2016. Donald Trump is controlled opposition but he has become a symbol of much of the anti-establishment sentiment. The next step is for them to move beyond controlled opposition figures.

The rise in alternative media and free speech is being predominantly led by the US. There are many social media channels such as the Ron Paul Liberty Report, Corbett Report, We are Change, Dollar Vigilante, Redacted, World Alternative Media, The Highwire, High Impact Flix, Garland Nixon and many others that challenge Establishment ideologies and agendas.

There are several new social media platforms that currently enable free(r) speech. These include MeWe, Gab, Minds, Odysee (Lbry), Blurt, and various social media apps on Hive. Some of these will remain true to enabling free speech and some will subtly include various forms of censorship (any social media with centralised control can easily introduce censorship).

The resistance to the Establishment in the US has grown to the extent that more controlled opposition is being used to quell it. Fox News are using the Tucker Carlson Show, Twitter has been taken over by Elon Musk, and Donald Trump has his own social media platform (Truth Social). It is going to become difficult to suppress or control the truth for much longer.

---

More posts

If you want to read any of my other posts, you can click on the links below. These links will lead you to posts containing my collection of works. These 'Collection of Works' posts have been updated to contain links to the Hive versions of my posts.

Hive: Future of Social Media

Spectrumecons on the Hive blockchain