The church had one thing going for it. It unified entire regions under one belief - think of the Roman Empire. For a long time, the church and the state were one and the same. Actually, the state was the church. The church set the rules by which society lived by. The word was the constitution. The Roman Catholic Church was the highest power in the land. Every ruler had to consult the Pope on any major decision. And every conquest was done in the name of the lord. The head of the British monarchy was the head of the state and the head of the Anglican church. And every prime minister had to consult the King/Queen when any major decision was to be made. But then came the philosophers who reasoned that men have the liberty to decide for themselves what rules they live by. And while it took a while, the idea of democracy began to take root. And over time, democracy took precedence over divine rule. The church lost its grip on the state.
Today, the state, while adopting aspects of the church - think leaders holding the Bible while being sworn in and witnesses holding the Bible before testifying - is separate from the church. And there is a general desire to keep the two separate. Maybe its because of the dirty nature of politics, or the dividing nature of politics. But the church is kept separate, only popping its head up from time to time on matters affecting the state. It is slowly losing people, as more and more people over time air as a non-practicing Christians, agnostic or atheist. We switched from being united in belief, to now being united by arbitrary regional boundaries. We took the power from the church, and gave it to the state.
The State
States have been the major powers for at least two hundred years now. And in that time certain states have done really well for themselves, lifting their people out of poverty faster than any other time in history. And even with both World Wars included, the last two hundred years have been a lot more peaceful than any other time in history - I know, hard to believe. But it is during this time that international travel took root. We developed larger ships, meaning we could travel further and carry more materials. We developed the motor vehicles, allowing us to traverse land a lot faster than before. We developed airplanes which crossed water drastically faster than any ship could. And with the use of all these developments, we became an intra-planetary species, no longer locked to any specific locale.
It is during this time that international trade developed. Trade led to capitalism, and capitalism led to wealth and power. The balance of power shifted from the state to individuals with resources. State leaders began turning to the wealthy for influence, leading to highly biased decision making on the part of the state. The world wars led to the creation of international bodies that regulated the behavior of the member states. Then came the international financing bodies that determined the parameters within which each state conducted itself to get funded. International trade became necessary. Borders became soft. If you had a piece of paper and the necessary resources, you could move anywhere with relative ease. All these factors led a drastic decline in powers of the state. People have become more and more disillusioned with the ability of the state to create positive change. It is reflected in the development of the free market economics, which argued that the state should leave the markets to self-regulate.
Society
But even as both the above structures lost dominance, one structure remained relatively strong. Society. Cluster within which people existed in unity with each other. These societies came up as a result of a variety of things. They could be based on tribe. On trade. On a natural resource like water. A shared belief. It could be anything, but these clusters of people were everywhere, and formed the basis upon which the church and the state gained power and prominence. It was said that a child wasn’t raised by a parent, but by a society. Values were decided on the societal level, and everyone lived by those values. A lot of resources were communal, and as a result, people knew each other. People would go far to trade, but still come back to the community they called home. The easiest way for the state to gain control was to influence the individual societies that existed within its arbitrary boundaries. And so it would enlist people to go to fight wars, but it was done to protect the place they called home. And at the end of it all, they came home. And then society fell.
Today, touch your neighbor’s and you’ll probably get shouted at at best, and sued at worst. That’s because we don’t recognize society anymore. We have individual liberties. Personal properties. And with the ease of travel these days, and the growing importance of individual wealth, we are able to move to other areas with ease. Areas where everyone else is there for the same reason you are. To create individual wealth. The poor up and leave the places they have called home as soon as they can, probably never to go back but as tourists. The middle class, as soon as they can, build their own houses and wall themselves off with either thick fences or high walls with shards of glass at the top or electric wires. They have to protect their property somehow. And the rich build houses in the middle of nowhere, where they can maintain their exclusive status. People don’t know their neighbors anymore. We are integrated across cultures more than ever before. But we couldn’t be more isolated.
Family
But again, one structure has stood the test of time - at least until now. The family has been the center of all the above structures. None of the above structures could stand on their own without the family. And the family has been relatively stable and same for all of history. The number of fathers and/or mothers might have varied from place to place, according to the individual customs. But these basics stayed the same. A father. A mother. And children. A self repeating cycle that has existed for thousands of years. And when all else failed, people could always turn back to the family structure for protection and safety. But in the last 60 years, the family, the last remaining stronghold of co-existence, is crumbling. Women are now part of the workforce. They are now more capable of providing. Men, for the most part, seem not to be aware of this. And its creating a power struggle that will end with the collapse of the family structure.
Gender roles are changing drastically. Women are coming back home at the same time the men are. And so a debate arises. Who ‘raises’ the children? Who cooks the meals? Who pays for school fees? Who pays for the date? Who takes the kid to school? Who goes for the kid’s visiting day? Both men and women expect the other to occupy the traditional role. But that isn’t viable today. The man isn’t the sole breadwinner anymore, as the woman today can and should chip in. And the woman isn’t just the caretaker anymore, as she is now capable of much more. But we haven’t yet adopted to the new paradigm, and that’s creating a whole swath of issues. Divorces are on the rise. There’s an epidemic of single parent households. And the data of single parent households shows that it is a net negative for society.
Individual Liberty
So what happens when the last unifying structure collapses? When the one structure that provided the basis for identity is no more? We are left with individual liberty. Individual rights. A person decides who they are. No one decides for him/her. And that has its consequences. We are left with gender fluidity. Where a child can decide that they are a man or a woman, disregarding completely the biological foundations. We are left with sexual fluidity, where anyone can sleep with anyone, whether male or female. We are left with a group of people who are unable to form any long lasting relationships. Because where would they learn that? What example has been set for them? This compounded by the fact that there is a lot more variety and choice than there has ever existed before, making choice decisions harder.
I mention these consequences as a statement of fact. I do not take any moral high ground. The debate of whether these changes are a net positive or net negative will rage on forever. But the fact is that these changes are occurring, and honestly, there is no going back. It is the world we live in. Progress is agnostic. It doesn’t care about your individual views. It is always marching forward. But god do I worry about our kids. That, from my generation’s perspective, is going to be one fucked up generation.