My question about the plandemic just made clear that there is no unanimity between people within a society. Btw, thanks for giving me an answer.
I did not talk about democracy but about government (or governance). Since large numbers of settled people must govern to keep things in order. Can you agree on the premise, that things do not sort themselves out just so?

I asked you about a different concept, about range and radius, for example. So far, the answer I perceive is that you are saying "everyone on his own" (thinking that you have a gun and a place to retreat when shit hits the fan). Now, while that may be a concept for some, it's a non option for others.

In a group of people in every day life you are always faced with those, who cannot defend themselves and with others who take advantage of that.
Do you agree that to govern such reality means that you organize police, courts and other institutions?
In oder to do that, do you agree that you need people who act as such and who in turn, need to be corrected and checked upon? You need an organization?

"Everyone on their own”, I see as a concept of survival, not a concept of living and governing together.

Obviously you and I are not in favor of how power is currently exercised, but as far as I can tell, this form of abuse of power needs to be met on an equal footing. Those are big pockets, currently the only means to get to the places of power and influence them. Since it is reasonable to assume that you don't have a pocket in which you keep billions of cash, at least I don't, the only chance is to change the system to one that has bugs only and is not the very function.
Unless, one favors that the powerful need to be destroyed and murdered through violence (instead of using milder means), for which you'd need the command over the military or organize an army with equal forces - which is not what I would call a success. Or, you favor a reset, which is even more drastic (total destruction).

This view - to change the system from feature to bug - needs all the support it can get. But when people - amongst themselves and outwards through media and social media - complain and whine all day long, want the cake and eat it, too, cannot wait, change daily their minds, formulate never ending demands etc., those who might be willing to reduce the system to some bugs, might shrug off the populace voices and continue to do what is the most convenient.

Corruption is by no means a characteristic of the powerful. It is found at the bottom to the same extent as it is found at the top. As long as a population is unable to behave within the smallest natural unit - the family - according to rules that benefit it instead of disturbing it, destroying it, it cannot absolve itself of mistakes such as envy, greed and corruption, etc. If a populace wants a savior instead of wanting to mind their business, this society might fail in its undertaking to subvert the abuse of power.

We are always in the middle of a story and the outcomes are not certain.