Now, that we have observed the society for many millennia, we can say that, whenever given the freedom to choose their own destiny, they fall back into the same order they attempted to break loose from. Why is the individual god-fearing, and when not, why does it choose a person to look up to and follows their lifestyle and behavior?

It seems to be in the nature of the individuum, if not its DNA to be a pack animal. And only ever so many other individuals are strong enough to be pack leaders, which, in turn, also work after the inspiration of their leader-image. While many individuals, if not all of then, strive for a position as a leader, barely any qualify for a role to look up to, or dictate rules. For rules are also a needed part for Society, not necessarily for order, but out of necessity of the individuals needing rules. For would one let the individual run free, it would be lost and not know what to do. False behavior would not be punishable, crime as a concept be inexistant and the inividual doubting its existance and purpose, for it will not have anything motivating it and giving it the reason it needs to perform anything.

In a case of a free society of free, isolated individuals who have the options, but not the coercion to learn and advance, they will, of course, not choose to, out of the laziness within the individual's nature. Now, since they are not organized and neither of the individuals have the quality to be a leader without a leader-image pre-existing, they must resort to something different to be their image of leadership, and therefore create a fictitious person to be the image they all direct themselves towards. This is then their God. And as they, in their denial of their natural curiosity out of no coercion for doing so, never learnt to understand the world and its functions, they use the same principle of who their leader-image is to explain the world to themselves. Therefore, it was either their god creating the world and its phenomena or other such deities who are, unlike the leader for that society, not looked up to with the same degree, sometimes even despised, and, when the leader-image eventually crystallizes out of the cluster again, will be mocked by those who previously created them. Eventually, some individual with a strong enough leading nature may claim to be a prophet of that God, speaking for the image of the leader and seizing its spot, actively becoming the first physical leader of that society. The leading individual may then either pass on leadership to its offspring or to another individual it sees as fit for the position, and that cycle will continue. Since at that point, the first leader has, in the name of the god the society has created, set rules the remaining individuals have to follow, they will finally have the motivation to perform actions in a regulated manner, and also the ability to percieve the stimulative sensation of breaking the rules and laws, so that at one point, another individual with leading qualities may attempt to seize power from the current leader and establish rules they see more fit. As the cycle continues, the individuals will come to the assumption no leader is perfect and attempt to form a society based on the opinion of the common individual. Out of these forms, we have both the Democracy and Socialism. While the democracy works on a rotating basis while holding the facade of a leading image which is given the

option to be exchanged on a rotating basis of the naturally and otherwise usual basis of four years, Socialism is built on the concept that there may not be a leading individual, but only the society itself upholding the rules. But once again, in both systems we can observe an eventual failure and demise.

Many a democratic society may choose to retain their leader out of the aforementioned laziness, even if said leader does not satisfy the urges of the society, but only upholds the need for a leader-image, since mostly it is the parliament within the democracy regulating society.

Socialism meanwhile never attempts to give an individual more power than any other, but within an organized system of committees deciding over other committees' suggestions, one speaking voice by a natural leader tends to overshadow others and crystallize itself out of the committees as a general leader.

In both cases, the leader will eventually become the dictator, returning to the former cycle to begin again. It is best to assume no society will ever be ablte to become independent on a leading role or regulations, however nonsensical they may be. No individual can, in any foreseeable future with any possibility be completely self-reliant and self-sustainable without at least a leader- image or a god to look up to and set rules to follow, no matter the purpsoe they serve, for they only exist to give the individual direction while orienting towards its leader-image. These are the reasons fascism, dictatorship and theocracy are some of the most popular forms of society and will with a high probability never cease to exist, and if they do, reemerge more swiftly than they have been abolished due to the nature of the individual and its society being undefiable.