As AI Ends Work: Waking Up to the Illusion of UBI – and the Need for a New System

How the End of Work Exposes the Crisis of a Broken System

The Collapse of the Money-centric System

Value is the foundation of human life. It shapes how we live, how we relate to one another, and what we believe matters. Wherever we place value – and whatever we collectively agree has value – becomes the organising principle of our behaviour, our systems, and ultimately our civilisation. The value set we adopt determines not only how we live today, but the consequences that unfold tomorrow.

For most of human history, and certainly in the world we share today, the dominant value set is built around money. Not human experience. Not community. Not contribution. Not wellbeing. Money.

Our governments, institutions, systems of governance, economies, and the very fabric of daily life all orbit this single construct. Everything has become transactional because the value of money – what it costs, what we earn, what we accumulate, what we attract, what we are given – has become the lens through which we make decisions about the present and the future. Our interpretation of how money works, or how it has worked in the past, has become the compass by which we navigate life.

But the problem with money is not new. It began the moment money stopped being a simple medium of exchange – a tool to facilitate trade – and instead became the store of value itself, the point and purpose of value, the thing we pursued for its own sake.

This shift was accepted because it appeared logical, even sensible. It seemed like common sense. Yet in reality, it was the easy option – the lazy option – and it became the pivot point that set humanity on a path that would eventually lead us away from ourselves.

What few people have ever recognised – and fewer still have been willing to challenge – is that once money became the centre of value, our focus shifted away from people and the human experience. Instead, we became fixated on money itself, and then on the power, position, control, and influence that money could buy.

Human life became stratified by how much or how little of it we possessed. Success became synonymous with wealth. Poverty became synonymous with failure. And the human experience was reduced to a spectrum between rich and poor.

Over time, this became normalised. Wealth and poverty have existed for so long, in so many forms and nuances, that most people accept the wealth divide as a natural feature of life. Many even believe it is acceptable – that some should thrive while others go without, that some should have more than they could ever need while others struggle to meet the basics of life.

The dynamic has only worsened. The transition from feudalism to industrialisation was celebrated as progress, but the underlying imbalance remained. The gap between those who have and those who have not continued to widen. Eventually, it reached a point where no rule, regulation, or law could meaningfully correct it. The imbalance had become embedded in the system itself.

And as always, more wants more. The existence of social classes, and the aspiration to climb them, was never enough.

A point came when the elites – those who already held power – realised that if they wanted to accumulate even more, they would have to change the rules of the game. And who was there to stop them? They already controlled everything.

People talk endlessly about new world orders, Fabianism, the WEF, and other groups. But regardless of the motivations or the plans behind these movements and those who run and influence any government, the reality is simple: any value system has a finite total value within it, even if it grows. That value moves depending on the actions – whatever the motivation and whether conscious or unconscious – of those who control the system.

Under a ring‑fenced money system, such as the gold standard, no new money can be created. The total value is fixed. Even if the scales of wealth are pushed to their limits, the wealthy cannot accumulate beyond the system’s natural ceiling. They can own a lot, but they cannot conjure the value out of thin air that would enable the few to own and control everything.

This system – flawed as it most certainly was – remained in place until 1971. And only when we understand what changed in that moment can we understand what has happened to us since.

The creation of the fiat money system, which allowed those in control to create money at will, enabled the greatest transfer of wealth in human history. It allowed the already wealthy to become unimaginably wealthier by creating money that could then be used to buy everything of real value – businesses, infrastructure, land, resources, and the essentials of community life.

Ownership and power were transferred to people who could never have acquired them under a value system grounded in reality. The new system was built on methods that were dishonest and fundamentally false.

Ordinary people didn’t question it. Why would they? Their value system – money – still looked the same. A pound was still a pound. A dollar was still a dollar. But the reality had changed completely.

This is why life today looks so different from life 60 or 70 years ago. There are anomalies everywhere. A single average wage once supported a family, bought a home, and provided security. Today, even the national minimum wage is not enough for one person to survive without benefits, charity, or debt.

Because money is the centre of value, people have been conditioned to believe that if they have what they want, everything is fine. So the consequences of the fiat system – what it has done to people, communities, and the environment – have not been treated as the priority they should have been.

The West has been told that the last 80 years have been peaceful, that there are no real problems ahead, and that nothing fundamental could ever change. Meanwhile, laws, working practices, and – most importantly – technology have changed at an accelerating pace. Everything has changed while we believed we were standing still.

We can see clearly what the Industrial Revolution did. We understand why the labour movement emerged. Industrialisation devalued human effort by replacing or reducing the need for human labour with machines wherever it could be done.

Yet we have failed to notice the evolution happening beneath our feet today. People believe the world still works as it did after the Second World War. Very few see the catastrophe unfolding around us: the next great technological shift – the rise and takeover of AI.

Just as people once accepted that machines would replace or reduce the need for manual labour, many now accept that AI will replace cognitive labour. And they assume this means nobody will have to work.

There is a dangerous collective assumption that technology has been created for the betterment of humanity. But the reality is that modern technology – especially AI – has been developed for profit and control, not for helping and supporting humanity.

If it had been created to improve life, we would already be living in a world where even the poorest had enough, where jobs were secure, and where technology enhanced life rather than replacing it.

Instead, we are living through a neoliberal, globalist model powered by fiat money – a model that extracts value from people and concentrates it in the hands of a few.

Even the architects of this system know it cannot work. That is why figures like Sam Altman now promote UBI – Universal Basic Income – as the supposed solution, for the fast-approaching time when for growing numbers, there will no longer be any kind of work.

The Fiat Era, AI, and the False Promise of UBI

UBI has been tested in small‑scale trials around the world. The idea is simple: everyone receives a set amount of income, regardless of what they do. It is appealing because it promises security in a world where jobs are disappearing. It reassures people that even if AI replaces their work, they will still be able to live the life they know today.

But this belief rests on a dangerous misunderstanding.

People assume UBI means they will continue to live as they do now – with the same homes, the same comforts, the same access to goods and services – simply without needing to work. They imagine a world where machines do everything, and humans simply enjoy the benefits.

This is fantasy.

UBI, in the context of the system we have today, is idealism built on a lie. It assumes that money can be endlessly created to pay off debts that already represent money that does not exist. It assumes that the system can continue functioning even as the economic role of billions of people disappears. It assumes that those who own everything will willingly fund the lives of those who own nothing.

The technological revolution – and the speed at which it has unfolded – was only possible because of the fiat money system. A system that survives only because enough people still believe in it. A system where most people already own nothing, and where the underlying structure is already broken.

The people who own everything – the corporations, the financial institutions, the elites who control the levers of power – cannot run a world where machines do all the work and billions of people contribute nothing.

The equation does not balance.

A system where everyone takes but no one contributes cannot function.

UBI is simply a tool to maintain the illusion that money still matters, that the system still works, and that people still need the very system that is failing them.

If we continue removing jobs at the current rate, a point will come – soon – when people outside the protected classes will have no means to survive. Not because they lack ability. Not because they lack willingness. But because the system will no longer have a place for them.

The question is not whether technology is good or bad. Technology can be used to advance humanity. But the reality we face is that AI has been developed to remove human involvement, not to improve human life. It has been built to maximise profit, minimise cost, and eliminate the “problem” of human labour.

And this is where the truth becomes unavoidable:

UBI will not save us.
It cannot save us.
It was never designed to.

UBI is the last tool of a dying system – a sticking plaster on a wound that requires surgery. It is the final illusion offered by a worldview that has already collapsed under its own contradictions.

The dam is cracking.
The pressure is rising.
And UBI cannot hold it back.

There is another way – a way of living that embraces technology without using it to replace or devalue people. A way built on local economies and local governance, with the Basic Living Standard at its heart. A way that restores human value, dignity, and sovereignty.

A time is approaching – sooner than most realise – when we will have to choose. We can continue sleepwalking down the path we are on, a path controlled by a few, where most will find neither benefit nor happiness. Or we can choose to walk a different way – a way where each of us contributes, participates, and lives with genuine freedom and sovereignty.

The alternative may flatten hierarchies, decentralise power, and remove the obscene concentrations of wealth that exist today. But it will also create lives worth living – lives grounded in peace, purpose, and the true human value that comes from within us, not from the money system that has defined us for far too long.

The Turning Point: Why UBI Cannot Save a Collapsing System

UBI is being sold as a compassionate solution, a stabiliser, a safety net for a world without work. But the truth is far more uncomfortable:

UBI is the final illusion of a system that has already collapsed in every meaningful way.

It is the last tool available to a worldview that cannot admit its own failure. It is the final attempt to preserve a structure that has been unravelling for decades – a structure built on false value, false scarcity, false growth, and false promises.

The destruction of jobs was not an accident.
It was not an unfortunate by‑product of progress.
It was a deliberate choice – a choice made by those who benefit from a world where human beings are no longer required.

The system has been moving toward this point for generations:

first by replacing physical labour with machines
then by replacing skilled labour with automation
now by replacing cognitive labour with AI

At each stage, the justification was the same: progress.

At each stage, the consequences were the same: displacement.

At each stage, the winners were the same: those who already held power.

And now, as the final stage unfolds, the system has run out of excuses – and out of time.

The truth is simple:

A society built on money cannot survive when people no longer earn it.

A society built on work cannot survive when people no longer have it.

A society built on consumption cannot survive when people cannot afford to consume.

UBI does not solve this.
It cannot solve this.
It was never designed to solve this.

UBI is a sedative – a way to keep people calm while the system collapses around them. It is a way to delay the moment when the public realises that the world they were promised no longer exists.

But the dam is cracking.
The pressure is rising.
And UBI cannot hold it back.

A world where billions of people have no economic role is not a world that can be stabilised with monthly payments.

It is a world that requires a complete rethinking of value, contribution, governance, and the purpose of human life.

And that is where the real alternative begins.

The Alternative: A System That Solves the Root Causes

If UBI is the last illusion of a dying system, then the question becomes unavoidable:

What replaces it?

Not a reform.
Not a patch.
Not a new policy within the old worldview.

What replaces it must be a new operating system for society – one that addresses the root causes of the crisis, not the symptoms. One that works with human nature, not against it. One that restores dignity, purpose, and sovereignty to every person.

That system exists.

It is called the Local Economy & Governance System (LEGS), and it is built on four pillars:

The Revaluation
The Basic Living Standard
The Contribution Culture
Personal Sovereignty

Together, they form a coherent, humane, practical alternative to the collapsing money-centric world.

1. The Revaluation: Changing What We Value

The crisis we face did not begin with fiat money.
It did not begin with globalisation.
It did not begin with AI.

It began with a value system that placed money above people.

The Revaluation is the shift from:

Money-centric value → human centric value

It is the moment we stop measuring life through:

price
profit
productivity
accumulation

and begin measuring it through:

wellbeing
contribution
community
dignity
sustainability
fairness

Without this shift, nothing else can work.

With it, everything else becomes possible.

2. The Basic Living Standard: Security as a Universal Right

The Basic Living Standard (BLS) is not UBI.
It is not a handout.
It is not dependency.

It is a guarantee that every person can meet their essential needs – food, shelter, energy, water, healthcare, and participation – from a normal week’s contribution.

It breaks the link between survival and employment.
It removes fear, insecurity, and dependency.
It ensures that no one can fall below the basics of life.

And unlike UBI, it is not funded by printing money or taxing a collapsing economy.
It is built into the structure of the local economy itself.

The BLS is the economic foundation of a people‑first society.

3. The Contribution Culture: Work as Meaning, Not Survival

The Contribution Culture replaces the toxic idea that:

“If you don’t work, you don’t deserve to live.”

with:

“Everyone who can contribute, contributes – because contribution is meaningful, valued, and secure.”

In a Contribution Culture:

work is not coerced
work is not a punishment
work is not a transaction
work is not a competition
work is not a fight for survival

Work becomes:

participation
purpose
community
shared responsibility
a source of dignity

This is the cultural foundation of the alternative – and the antidote to the crisis of work in an AI‑dominated world.

4. LEGS: The Local Economy & Governance System

LEGS is the structural foundation – the practical framework that makes the Revaluation, the BLS, and the Contribution Culture real.

It is built on:

local economies
local food systems
local governance
participatory democracy
shared responsibility
transparency
decentralisation

LEGS solves the problems that have existed since long before fiat:

centralised power
hierarchical control
distance between decision‑makers and consequences
systems that cannot see the ground
economies that treat people as units
governance that manages people instead of serving them

And it solves the problems that fiat accelerated:

extraction
inequality
speculation
debt dependency
the illusion of infinite value

And it solves the problems that AI will make catastrophic:

the removal of jobs
the collapse of income
the loss of agency
the erosion of sovereignty
the concentration of power in the hands of a few

LEGS is not a policy.

It is a new operating system for society.

5. Personal Sovereignty: The Human Foundation

Personal sovereignty is the right – and responsibility – of every individual to live as a free, ethical, self‑directed human being.

It is protected through:

security
transparency
locality
shared responsibility
meaningful contribution

The money-centric system destroys sovereignty by creating dependency through UBI.

LEGS restores sovereignty by creating participation.

Why LEGS Works Where UBI Cannot

UBI tries to preserve the old system.
LEGS replaces it.

UBI depends on money.
LEGS depends on contribution.

UBI centralises power.
LEGS decentralises it.

UBI treats people as passive recipients.
LEGS treats people as active participants.

UBI assumes scarcity.
LEGS builds natural abundance.

UBI keeps people dependent.
LEGS restores personal sovereignty.

UBI is temporary.
LEGS is sustainable.

UBI is the illusion of security.
LEGS is the reality of it.

The Choice Ahead

Humanity is approaching a moment where the old system will no longer function – not because of fiat, not because of politics, but because AI will remove the economic role of billions of people.

UBI cannot solve this.

It was never meant to.

The only real alternative is a system that:

restores human value
guarantees security
redefines work
decentralises power
rebuilds community
and places people first in every sense

That system exists.

It is coherent.
It is humane.
It is practical.
It is necessary.

It is the Local Economy & Governance System, built on the Basic Living Standard, the Contribution Culture, and the Revaluation.

This is not a dream.
It is not a theory.
It is not a utopia.

It is the only path that deals with the root causes – not just the symptoms – of the unravelling we are living through.

And the time to choose it is now.

When you can see that rules and laws prevent basic survival, you will understand that centralised governance has gone too far

A question that more and more people have begun to ask is: who does government really work for?

For some, that question comes from living at the sharpest edge of society’s problems – for example, those who can no longer afford to feed themselves properly. But the truth is that across every part of society – our communities, small businesses, clubs, pubs, and the countless organisations that sit outside the government or public‑sector bubble – rules, regulations and requirements are appearing everywhere. And when you look at what these rules actually do, many no longer make any sense at all in terms of allowing people to continue doing what they have always done.

Look more closely and the picture darkens further. Through licences, taxation, penalty notices, workplace directives and endless compliance demands, the ability of anything small, people‑centred, cost‑effective or community‑driven to function is being slowly strangled.

The cumulative effect is suffocating. Many businesses have already gone to the wall because of red tape alone – and that’s before we even consider the wider impact of a money‑centric system and a government culture obsessed with growth, targets and perpetual money creation.

Very few have questioned any of this. Not because people haven’t sensed something was wrong, or felt that the direction of travel jarred with the common sense of real life. But because every change introduced over decades has been sold as “progress”.

Each new rule has been framed as something that improves life, modernises society, or makes everything better for us all – as if the past was universally terrible and the only possible path was the one we’re on.

Yet the freedom we believe we have today is already hollow. With every new move the machinery of government makes, that freedom becomes more restricted.

At some point, we must confront the uncomfortable truth: what is being presented as freedom is increasingly just conformity to a narrative – a form of oppression wearing a very misleading name.

And all of this is happening at a time when global tensions are escalating. With our traditional allies across the Atlantic now posturing over who “owns” Greenland, and European elites openly entertaining the idea of war with Russia and the East, the systems we rely on are heading toward collapse – potentially in a matter of months. That’s before we even consider the other crises and issues lining up behind them.

Without meaningful change – and without a wholesale rejection of the rule‑based system that is already choking every part of life – we face a future where people simply cannot help themselves when they most need to.

Whether it’s farms being unable to grow food, pubs being unable to operate as social spaces, or low‑paid workers being unable to earn enough to live, the dark clouds gathering ahead point to a moment where survival becomes impossible. Not because people lack the will or ability, but because someone in an office miles away decided to make normal life illegal.

Yes, governments talk about “emergency powers” – the idea that in a crisis, the state will temporarily turn a blind eye to rules that would otherwise be enforced. But that raises a very telling question: if these rules can be suspended when reality demands it, who were they ever really serving in the first place?

The time is fast approaching when people may have no choice but to ignore rules and regulations that were created solely because they suited someone else’s interests, rather than being developed to help people live. Frameworks that should never have existed in a genuinely free society, that are now the very things preventing society from functioning.

Of course, we will always need accepted and shared ways of doing things. But those ways should be created, maintained and managed by the people actually involved and the communities they will affect. Not by distant agendas and idealistic theories detached from basic human values.

Systems should reflect how life really works for everyone, not how it might look in the imagination of those who believe people must be forced to behave as they are told.

Dark as the future may appear, there is an opportunity emerging. People and Communities can take back our power and build a system centred on people, community and the environment – one that genuinely puts human beings first.

This alternative already exists in outline. It’s called the Local Economy & Governance System. Built on the foundation of The Basic Living Standard, and shaped by principles such as participatory democracy and the contribution culture.

It offers a complete shift away from the money‑centric disaster path we are currently on. It creates a world where accountability is shared, where frameworks support life rather than restrict it, and where everyone is involved in shaping the society they live in.

You cannot Build the Future with the Architects of the Past

It’s been quite a week for Reform, and without the current political backdrop, the events unfolding could have been enough to suggest that the evolution of the Reform project would grind to a halt – no matter what came next.

Until now, the party – new in name only – has been riding high in the polls, cultivating the appearance of a government‑in‑waiting that could do no wrong. Their greatest advantage has been simple: unlike Labour, the Conservatives or the Liberal Democrats, Reform has not yet been involved in creating the problems that have brought the country to its knees.

For many voters, that alone has been enough. It’s why so many have been willing to overlook the party’s patchy record in local government since taking over a number of councils last May.

But for others, things have never been so straightforward. A growing list of unsettling questions has followed the current party of Nigel Farage, particularly around its fixation on grand, US‑style DOGE ‘solutions’ and other plans for the future such as parachuting in business‑world advisers to take charge where they already recognise that inexperienced politicians cannot.

These announcements may sound impressive to a disillusioned electorate, but – like the words and policies of every government in recent living memory – they tend to obscure reality rather than confront it head on.

The name “Reform” has always been a question in itself. But its evolution is even more important to consider now, given its position on the political right.

Reform was born of the Brexit Party, which was itself born of UKIP (the pre‑2016, EU Referendum version), which itself emerged from the often‑forgotten Anti‑Federalist League.

Many of the same people have moved through each iteration. And while today’s Reform claims to draw support from across the political spectrum, its origins lie firmly in the fissures of the Conservative Party. Cracks visible since the time of Heath, that widened after Thatcher’s departure and during Major’s distinctly EU-phile premiership.

What began as an anti‑EU movement became a home for many disenfranchised Conservatives – including Farage himself. However, beyond the anti‑EU narrative that he and others have pushed so effectively, there has never been much inclination to challenge how the system itself works when you get into the mechanics of how everything really functions and who it all serves.

Those who have watched closely – the language, the policies, the motivations, the hands being shaken – could always see that “Reform” risked being a deeply misleading name.

Instead of providing inspiration and genuine reason for hope, each new development has instead reinforced the fear that this movement is less about genuine reform and more about resetting the same establishment machinery under a different banner – essentially being about preserving everything in our system of economics and governance that is fundamentally wrong and doing the most harm.

So, when Laila Cunningham was announced as the London mayoral candidate a few days ago, there was reason to wonder if this might be the moment something changed – and be a sign that Reform could still recalibrate and chart a different course. However, within days, the party took a massive and arguably defining leap backwards, confirming once again that any hopes for the moment were misplaced and those ongoing concerns have been right all along.

Nadhim Zahawi’s defection from the Conservatives – bringing with him a pile of political baggage symbolising everything wrong with not just the Tories but the entire political class – was the moment any germinating bubble burst.

The shift in messaging across the media landscape was also immediate. And anyone at Reform HQ would have done well to heed the sudden change in tone emerging from sources that had previously been supportive to them that sat outside the echo chamber of dedicated ‘reformists’ who still believe that Farage’s machine is capable of doing no wrong.

Then came Robert Jenrick. His “sacking” and expulsion from the Conservatives morphed into a full Reform defection in under six hours yesterday.

Like Zahawi, Jenrick was deeply embedded in everything the Johnson and Sunak governments were about. And the circumstances and emerging detail of his departure suggest a politician looking backwards to more of where we have already been; not forwards, as few outside politics really doubt will need to be the direction of travel – built on a definable break with and departure from the past.

Reform now faces a critical question: with its growing (re)alignment to establishment figures and money‑centric politics, is it just becoming a reformed version of the very party that it was ostensibly re-formed to replace?

The identity crisis within conservatism and the political right that has existed since the days of the Common Market – now seems to be reappearing within Reform. And with each defection eagerly embraced by Farage, and in ways that suggest they were always part of the very same machine, just with different interpretations of how it should work, the chance of a genuinely different future emerging from the right appears to be quickly slipping away.

In the end, it all comes back to the same unavoidable truth:

You cannot build the future with the architects of the past.

Reform’s recruitment strategy signals a retreat into old habits, and their words and policies suggest they will either fall into line with the current establishment trajectory or simply trash whatever remains after Labour has finished with it – IF they take power after the General Election takes place – as many people desperate for change still hope they will do.

Regrettably, those tired and bewildered people who believe they are the answer may not see it or wish to accept it, but Reform, Reconservatives, Reformatives, ReCons, Conservatives 2.0, or whatever they really are in their current form isn’t what the UK or anyone genuinely need.

There is nothing about them that suggests that they are willing, able or indeed ready to deliver on behalf of us all.

Boldness and clarity are essential for building a better future. Not a thickening cloud of uncertainty, pinned by figures from the past that people looking forward know it would be much healthier to leave behind.

Reform and the Architects of the Past PDF_Vers3_19Jan26 Download

Strategy or Happenstance? Reform UKs London Mayoral Choice and the Dynamics Left Unspoken

Reform UK’s decision to put forward Laila Cunningham as its candidate for London Mayor marks an unexpected turn in the capital’s political landscape. The announcement immediately drew attention – not only because Cunningham is a relatively new figure in frontline politics, but because her selection comes at a time when both major parties have struggled to understand the unique dynamics of London’s electorate.

For years, the Conservatives have attempted to unseat Sadiq Khan with candidates who, regardless of their individual strengths, were never positioned to succeed. London’s mayoral race is shaped by a distinctive blend of demographics, political culture, and electoral behaviour that the party has repeatedly misread. The result has been a series of campaigns that failed to resonate with the city’s diverse and often unpredictable voter base.

Against this backdrop, Reform UK’s choice of Cunningham raises questions. Ant Middleton, who had openly expressed interest in the role, had long understood that the decision would not fall in his favour. Cunningham’s media visibility may have played a part, but Reform’s leadership appears to believe her candidacy offers something more -perhaps a chance to broaden the party’s appeal or to challenge assumptions about who speaks for London. This is a bold calculation, especially with polling currently placing Reform at 19%, well behind Labour’s 32%.

The reaction to Cunningham’s Muslim background was swift and, in many quarters, hostile. It reflects a broader climate of suspicion that has grown around anything involving Muslims in public life. A counter‑establishment narrative has taken hold in parts of the electorate, one that frames Muslims as central to every perceived societal problem and warns of an imminent cultural takeover. These fears, though unfounded, have become politically potent.

Compounding the issue is the behaviour of public institutions. Across the UK, officials have often responded to sensitive cultural or religious matters with caution bordering on paralysis. This has created the impression – fair or not – that Muslims receive special treatment or are shielded from scrutiny. In such an environment, the emergence of a Muslim woman as a high‑profile political candidate becomes, for some, a symbol of the very anxieties they already hold.

Yet this interpretation overlooks a more grounded reality: many Muslims in Britain want to contribute to a future rooted in the country’s historic values and civic culture.

Cunningham’s candidacy could, if handled well, offer an opportunity to rethink the role of Muslims in public life and to challenge the simplistic narratives that have dominated recent debate.

Understanding the tension between perception and reality requires examining how Britain’s current image of Islam was formed. Over decades, geopolitical events, media coverage, and political rhetoric have shaped a picture that often bears little resemblance to the lived experiences of most Muslims.

The same system that has left many British citizens feeling ignored or exploited has also inflicted deep harm on communities abroad, pushing some toward ideologies that would otherwise hold little appeal.

Commentators such as Douglas Murray have highlighted a central challenge within Islam: its foundational texts were written for a world vastly different from today, and some interpretations insist these texts are immutable.

This creates a tension between traditionalist readings and the expectations of a modern, pluralistic society.

But this challenge is not unique to Islam; all religions grapple with the task of reconciling ancient teachings with contemporary realities.

Historically, religions have served as social frameworks – systems that guide behaviour, shape norms, and maintain order. They have been used to protect communities, but also to control them.

When people look back at periods in which Islamic empires flourished, they often point to eras when religious teachings were applied most literally. For some Muslims, this reinforces the belief that returning to those values is the path to renewal.

However, the rise of Islamic militancy cannot be understood without acknowledging the role of Western intervention. Wars, regime changes, resource extraction, and the installation of compliant leaders have destabilised regions and eroded local cultures.

While Western societies were encouraged to embrace consumerism and individualism, other nations experienced upheaval, corruption, and violence – often with Western support or involvement.

In this context, strict religious frameworks can become appealing to those who feel their societies have been dismantled.

This dynamic has fuelled a misconception in the West: that the conflict is between Muslims and non‑Muslims.

In reality, the tension lies between militant interpretations of Islam and the global systems – economic, political, and military – that have shaped the modern world.

Yet many people struggle to distinguish between extremists and ordinary Muslims, just as they struggle to see how Western policies have contributed to the anger and disillusionment that some now express.

The absence of political leadership on these issues has only deepened the divide. Few leaders are willing to speak openly about the historical and structural forces at play.

Silence has become the norm, not because the issues are too complex, but because acknowledging them would challenge the interests of those who benefit from the status quo.

Meanwhile, the system that created these tensions is showing signs of strain. Economic instability, cultural fragmentation, and declining trust in institutions suggest that a new approach is needed – one rooted in community, shared values, and a commitment to the common good.

Such a future must include Muslims who are willing to reinterpret their faith in ways that align with a modern, secular society.

In this context, Reform UK’s selection of Laila Cunningham may prove more significant than it first appears.

Whether by strategic design or political opportunism, the party has taken a step that could reshape public debate. Whether they are ready for the responsibility – or whether they will ever win the chance to exercise it – is another question entirely.

Strategy or Happenstance PDF_Vers1_8Jan26 Download

The Road We Are On is Broken – And We Built It Ourselves

The solutions we need won’t come from anything we already do. Because it’s everything we already do that caused the problems.

The Familiar Path That Led Us Here

Right now, people believe they’re seeing the full picture. They believe they understand the crisis, the chaos, the uncertainty – because the surface‑level symptoms are impossible to ignore.

But the deeper reality is still being missed. Not because it’s hidden, but because most people aren’t yet in a place where they can recognise what they’re looking at.

Perspectives shape perception. And when perspectives are shaped by habit, fear, conditioning, or the comfort of familiar narratives, they filter out the very things that matter most.

That’s why so many warning signs are dismissed. Why so many contradictions go unchallenged. Why people can feel informed while still being completely unaware of what’s actually unfolding.

Understanding doesn’t come from information alone. It comes from readiness – from the moment when someone’s internal landscape shifts enough for them to finally see what was always there.

Until that readiness arrives, even the clearest truth will look like noise, exaggeration, or irrelevance.

And that’s the challenge we face: not just to speak truth, but to recognise that truth only lands when the conditions allow it to.

Seeing Through the Fog of Perspectives

In times like these, people assume they’re fully aware of what’s happening around them.

The noise is loud, the chaos is visible, and the headlines never stop. It creates the illusion of clarity – as if simply noticing the disruption means understanding its cause.

But awareness and understanding are not the same thing.

Much of what matters is still out of view. Not because it’s hidden, but because most people aren’t yet equipped to recognise the patterns behind the events.

They see the symptoms, not the structure.

They see the fallout, not the forces shaping it.

They see the drama, not the design.

That’s why so many explanations sound far‑fetched to those who aren’t ready for them. Why warnings are dismissed. Why truths are labelled extreme until the moment they become obvious.

And this is the danger: when people believe they already see everything, they stop looking for what they’ve missed.

Rattles in the Vehicle We Thought Was Safe

We are, metaphorically speaking, passengers in a vehicle we don’t realise is breaking or already broken.

We race along, ignoring the rattles, because it’s still moving.

We convince ourselves everything’s fine, right up until the moment it stops and we’re forced to accept that we’ve broken down.

The warning signs are everywhere. No matter your business, sector, or situation, the red flags are waving from every direction in plain sight. But because the wheels are still turning – or appear to be – we keep believing that a change of driver or a quick pit stop is all we need.

We imagine that after a brief pause, the journey will resume, more comfortable than before, with a better seat and a better view.

But the vehicle – whether you can picture it as a car, train, or bus – represents everything we do and everything we believe we’ve always done.

The road beneath it is the path we’ve been set upon, shaped by our behaviours, expectations, attitudes, approaches, and the values we’ve allowed to guide us.

The Quiet Ways We All Contributed

And here’s the uncomfortable truth: no matter what problem you’re facing, no matter what crisis is unfolding, if it involves decisions made by others, then yes – you can probably identify who’s responsible. But at some level, we all share responsibility. We all helped build the road.

Even if we didn’t make the active choices that led us here, into this mess, we made choices nonetheless.

When we avoided risk, chose the easy option, kept quiet to avoid rocking the boat, ignored the truth, or failed to do what was right – we took action. And often, that action was simply allowing those with hidden agendas to get their way.

Everything has a cost.

For decades, we’ve been conditioned by manipulation, sleight of hand, and narratives designed to convince us that non‑conformity leads to isolation.

But the real cost has been far greater.

Everything that once held value – our businesses, workplaces, sports, social spaces, food, water, money, communication, education, jobs, reputations – has been diminished.

Not by accident, but by design. So it could be reformed, centralised, and ultimately placed under someone else’s control – even while we still believe we own it.

This includes the institutions people still trust by default: government, the public sector, and the systems built around them. They were supposed to safeguard society, yet they’ve become part of the machinery that has allowed decline, mismanagement, and manipulation to take root. Not because everyone within them is corrupt, but because the structures themselves are no longer fit for purpose – and haven’t been for a long time.

Understanding Comes Only When We’re Ready

The problems we face — in farming, hospitality, industry, with people, community, the environment, government, the public sector – all stem from the same system. From all the “everythings” each and every one of us do.

No matter our background or bubble, it all adds up to the same thing: the trouble the world is now in.

And what we’ve done and been doing so far cannot or will not fix it.

It doesn’t matter if we wait for a change in government while continuing to elect candidates chosen by people we don’t know.

It doesn’t matter if we keep believing the establishment is structured to serve us, or that it has the integrity to do so.

It doesn’t matter if we trust the financial system, or believe that inflation and the cost of living are beyond anyone’s control.

If we don’t change the fundamental building blocks – of life, economics, and governance – then no matter who’s in charge, things will only get worse.

And we’ll keep being told they’re getting better.

Crisis as Catalyst

Today, life just happens to us.

Business, money, governance – they’re systems we’re expected to show up for, participate in, and conform to. That’s it.

But conformity is what brought us here. And we’re standing at the doorway of something that, once we step through it, may quickly reveal that there is no way back.

It’s only this way and we only got here because we surrendered our power – more often than not without ever realising that we had even given it up.

Building Something That Puts People First

If we want to change anything – even the smallest thing – in the world around us, we must participate. We must play our part. That’s what living a proper life demands.

And if we want things not just to improve, but to become truly better, then we must all get involved.

The collapse we’re experiencing offers something rare: the chance to see and experience life differently. A chance that wouldn’t have come if things had continued as they were. Which they no longer can.

As circumstances worsen and reality begins to speak for itself, we have a choice.

We can take back our power. We can work with the people we know – the people we share our lives with – to reclaim genuine control. To put people, community, and the environment first.

The Local Economy & Governance System (LEGS) – built upon The Basic Living Standard – offers a new structure for the future.

LEGS isn’t a shortcut, and it isn’t a promise that someone else will fix things for us.

LEGS is simply a framework that puts people, community, and the environment back at the centre of life – where they always should have been.

What comes next won’t be shaped by governments, institutions, or systems that have already failed us. It will be shaped by the choices we make now, the conversations we have with the people around us, and the willingness we each find to choose and step through the doorway in front of us, that leads to a Future that no one else can define.

The world we knew is ending. But what replaces it is still ours to decide.

Category: Articles

As AI Ends Work: Waking Up to the Illusion of UBI – and the Need for a New System

How the End of Work Exposes the Crisis of a Broken System

The Collapse of the Money-centric System

The Fiat Era, AI, and the False Promise of UBI

The Turning Point: Why UBI Cannot Save a Collapsing System

The Alternative: A System That Solves the Root Causes

1. The Revaluation: Changing What We Value

2. The Basic Living Standard: Security as a Universal Right

3. The Contribution Culture: Work as Meaning, Not Survival

4. LEGS: The Local Economy & Governance System

5. Personal Sovereignty: The Human Foundation

Why LEGS Works Where UBI Cannot

The Choice Ahead

Further Reading:

When you can see that rules and laws prevent basic survival, you will understand that centralised governance has gone too far

Further Reading: Building a People-First Society

You cannot Build the Future with the Architects of the Past

How the End of Work Exposes the Crisis of a Broken System

The Collapse of the Money-centric System

The Fiat Era, AI, and the False Promise of UBI

The Turning Point: Why UBI Cannot Save a Collapsing System

The Alternative: A System That Solves the Root Causes

1. The Revaluation: Changing What We Value

2. The Basic Living Standard: Security as a Universal Right

3. The Contribution Culture: Work as Meaning, Not Survival

4. LEGS: The Local Economy & Governance System

5. Personal Sovereignty: The Human Foundation

Why LEGS Works Where UBI Cannot

The Choice Ahead

Further Reading:

Share this:

Further Reading: Building a People-First Society

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

The solutions we need won’t come from anything we already do. Because it’s everything we already do that caused the problems.

The Familiar Path That Led Us Here

Seeing Through the Fog of Perspectives

Rattles in the Vehicle We Thought Was Safe

The Quiet Ways We All Contributed

Everything has a cost.

Understanding Comes Only When We’re Ready

Crisis as Catalyst

Building Something That Puts People First

Further Reading

1. Awakening & How We Perceive the Crisis

2. The Hidden System Behind Society’s Problems

3. Economics, Collapse & the Global Order

4. Politics, Institutions & Public Misunderstandings

5. The Local Economy & Governance System (LEGS) and the Basic Living Standard (BLS)

Share this: