Wow, fascinating Guardian article. I'm in agreement with much of what you're saying. I remember reading about psychologist and organization development expert Edgar Schein when I was getting my master's degree. His initial research was done during the Korean war where he studied how American prisoners of war had been brainwashed by their captors. What he found was that in the prison camps, 80% of the people survived the ordeal by being passive. The other percentage were people that were either resistors or collaborators. After the war, when the military reflected on which POWs had resisted to a radical degree and which had collaborated with their captors enough to warrant a possible court martial, they found that roughly 5% to 10% of American soldiers fell in either category. Both groups were made up of individuals who felt they needed to take action in any situation. Together, they differed from the remaining 80% or so of prisoners who survived by remaining passive.

So there's always going to be a large group of people who are willing to pay a high price for stability. In the end, most people rationalize the pain and simply learn what they’re supposed to learn. So I think change always comes from a small percentage of people waking up to the superficial and false constructs that most of the public buys into. I very much agree that the only way we can create change that actually matters (vs. elections or protests as an example) is to identify with new stories and systems that promote decentralization. Because the financial elite and their global control systems need our dependency to achieve their goals. Blockchain economy, homesteading movement, all forms of community cooperatives, sharing economy principles, etc. Anything that taps into the naturally occurring self-organizing capacity of the collective, along with using the best of what technology can be. Ok I'm done now lol