The need for individuals to pull together for both the common good and their longer term individual good means that cheats and freeloaders must be punished. This is an urgent need which lies at the foundation of a healthy society and provides a powerful argument for a measure of coercion in political life. The question is who should do the coercing?
Western societies are commonly described as democracies but in practice the extent to which the people rule is very limited. Instead of rule by the people the deal is that the people let a politcal class rule and manage the economy and society in return for the freedom to live within a framework of consumer goods and private freedoms. Those who have, have the goods and those who have not are brought into the political consensus of passivity by welfare benefits. In return for these benefits those who could if they wished take an active part in political life and make society into a true democracy allow the political class to rule.
In a time of peace and plenty this is not such a bad deal but don't call it democracy.
Political theorists have assumed that democratic freedoms grow with a middle class which can hold the state to account but with the growth see an alternative model in which the freedom to make and spend money is granted in exchange for obedience.
There are many ways the consensus of passivity could end. For example, external threats of the usual kind eg war. External threats of a new kind eg global warming. Internal threats of social division through immigration. Or systemic threats, such as widespread abuse of the welfare system.
The consensus of passivity like every other system will break. The question is how.
