Correct. As I said above, usually its one group of power-hungry people throwing out the existing group in power and setting up the same basic type of system of control via manipulation that is executed by false narrative. People need to learn to identify false narratives and manipulation. Maybe those are things we can teach in school?

Well, people might figure out what is best for them, but there's no guarantee it will work in the large scale. Nobody is educated enough to fix the big picture, and this is the reason we still need a bigger structure, because there will always be states which punish their neighbors for not being competitive enough either economically or having a capable military to defend themselves. This goes into geopolitcs, but it is another topic I guess.

Your Catholic Church example was great. Basically, you said clearly that historically, society rewards wealth. Over time, different manipulators changed the societal narrative to steal the power and then hoarded the power and wealth for themselves. But you basically said they should have stuck with the original corruption of the Catholic Church and never should have changed it in the first place.

Few centuries ago (—something between 300 to 400 years) Jean-Jacques Rousseau was working with some corrupt bureaucracts in the border customs, and he thought the idea of nationalism would fix everything, as they would switch their loyalties from their own bosses / authorities to the people. Practically it meant to switch loyalties from the French crown to the French people i.e. having monoculture, instead of two hierarchies where aristocrats had their own concept of good and where masses had their own.

The reason it changed each time was because that societal narrative wasn't working for the masses and they all agreed to a new narrative that they hoped would work better for them. It didn't but that is because the narrative-makers were self-serving. We need to stop rewarding manipulators with wealth. And in those days, it was very easy for TPTB to control the narrative, yet they couldn't keep up the false narrative forever.

This is really hard to fix, because some people are always better than others in playing the system for their own benefit.

If I understand where your point of view is coming from, this is what you mean by counter-culture, correct? A narrative different than the main societal narrative, but not necessarily any more true (and possibly demonstrably less true) than the official societal narrative?

Yes, corrrect.

The truth is that in the current economic system, the rich are hoarding all the resources to the detriment of the masses, and as a society, we need to change the way money distribution works. ... The MSM and many corporations seems to support these false BLM and ANTIFA narratives, which makes it appear that the current group in power are grabbing on to a new angle with which to hold power since their current narrative is rapidly disintegrating with the light of truth shined on it from social media and alternative journalism. Hence the mass banning we are seeing now on Twitter, FB and Reddit.

True, the narrative—at least for me seems to point towards "divide and conquer" style of politics. I don't think it will work on the long run, but they might go with is because there's no better alternatives, or they are just going with it to adjust their internal structure for the imminent fallout.

But things like communism simply move the wealth from private to government, giving those in the government all the power to exploit the same as the private owners did before them. Switching from one exploitative system to another does no one any good.

True.

The solution is to 1. stop rewarding manipulators with wealth 2. educate people better they have better discernment skills to spot false narratives and manipulation. 3. Then there will be more people like me, who go after the existing government legally and peacefully in order to change it so it serves the people instead of exploits the people. With more people pushing on the government to force them to operate openly and fairly, things will just naturally improve.

This is tricky, because e.g. without criminals, there would be no need for police, but after creating a police force, you'll eventually have police officers who incidentally exploit their position of power. We therefore return to the end of my last comment, it is the problems within the people, which could be dealt with various ways. Some people might be deterred for doing criminal acts by the fear of punishment, but some people become criminals just despite it. Some people might think they'll never get caught, so educating them might be a lost cause if they are not intelligent enough, or lack the mental faculties to become better persons.