here are moments in history when the old rules no longer explain the world. Institutions that once appeared permanent begin to lose legitimacy, citizens become increasingly sceptical of authority and governments struggle to govern populations that no longer accept inherited forms of power. Anthropologists describe such moments as periods of transition, when societies renegotiate the norms and relationships that hold them together.

The world may be entering one of those periods today. This is not simply another cycle of political unrest. Nor is it merely a collection of isolated protests occurring in different countries. What is unfolding appears to be something deeper: a global crisis of the social contract—the unwritten agreement through which citizens surrender certain freedoms in exchange for security, justice, opportunity and representation.

For much of the Twentieth Century, governments derived legitimacy from their ability to improve people’s lives. Economic growth, expanding education, public healthcare, infrastructure and rising living standards convinced citizens that the state could deliver a better future. Even where governments were imperfect, many believed that tomorrow would be better than today. That confidence is steadily eroding.

Across continents, many people face soaring living costs, housing shortages, insecure employment and growing inequality despite decades of technological progress. Young adults often expect to be less economically secure than their parents. Stable careers are giving way to temporary work. Automation and artificial intelligence are introducing new uncertainties about the future of employment. Economic growth continues, but many citizens increasingly question who benefits from it.

Anthropologically, this represents more than financial hardship. It reflects the weakening of reciprocity—the expectation that individuals contribute to society and, in return, society provides security and opportunity. When reciprocity weakens, trust weakens with it.

Trust is perhaps the world’s most endangered political resource. The growing scepticism toward governments is not confined to democracies or authoritarian states. In democracies, declining voter confidence, political polarisation and dissatisfaction with institutions suggest that elections alone no longer guarantee legitimacy.

In more centralised political systems, surveillance and tighter control may preserve order temporarily, but they do not necessarily generate genuine public trust. The digital revolution has transformed this relationship even further. For thousands of years, political authority depended upon controlling information. Today, every citizen possesses a publishing platform in the form of a smartphone. Governments no longer communicate with passive audiences but with millions of active participants capable of documenting events, organising protests, challenging official narratives and mobilising across borders within hours. This technological shift has democratised information while simultaneously fragmenting it. Truth itself has become contested. Competing narratives spread faster than institutions can verify them, creating societies in which citizens increasingly distrust not only governments but also journalists, scientists, academics, and one another. The result is a crisis not simply of politics but of shared reality.

The world is not simply witnessing political unrest. It is experiencing a profound cultural transformation in how human beings understand power, legitimacy and citizenship. The old social contract is under unprecedented strain; a new one has yet to emerge.

Global crises continue to expose the limitations of existing governance. The Covid-19 pandemic demonstrated both the importance and fragility of public institutions. Climate change increasingly reminds humanity that environmental systems ignore national borders. Wars in Ukraine and Gaza have generated humanitarian catastrophes while polarising international opinion and prompting renewed debates over international law, accountability and the responsibilities of global institutions. Military tensions in the Middle East and elsewhere have contributed to public uncertainty about whether political leaders are capable of preventing escalation. For many citizens, these events reinforce a troubling perception: governments appear increasingly capable of mobilising for conflict but less effective at addressing everyday concerns such as affordable housing, healthcare, education and economic security.

Artificial intelligence has introduced another layer of uncertainty. Unlike previous technological revolutions, the AI is capable of reshaping not only manual labour but also ‘professional’ and ‘creative’ occupations. The central political question is no longer whether AI will transform economies—it almost certainly will—but whether governments can ensure that its benefits are distributed equitably.

History offers an important lesson. Revolutions rarely emerge solely because societies become poor. They occur when expectations rise faster than institutions can respond, when people believe that the existing order no longer reflects shared notions of justice and when alternative visions become imaginable. This does not necessarily mean the world is approaching a single global uprising. History is rarely so uniform. Rather, we may witness increasing waves of localized protests, constitutional reforms, new political movements, stronger demands for participatory governance and experimentation with new models of democracy, economic organisation and social welfare.

Anthropologists remind us that political systems are cultural creations rather than natural laws. Monarchies appeared permanent until they did not. Colonial empires seemed invincible until they dissolved. Industrial capitalism transformed societies that had been agricultural for millennia.

Every political order eventually adapts—or is replaced—not because history follows a predetermined script, but because human societies continuously renegotiate power. The deeper question, therefore, is not whether governments will survive. Governments almost certainly will. The more significant question is whether current forms of governance are suited to a Twenty first-Century world characterised by instantaneous communication, global interdependence, artificial intelligence, demographic change and planetary environmental challenges.

Perhaps what is ending is not government itself but an understanding of authority. Citizens increasingly expect transparency rather than secrecy, participation rather than passive representation, accountability rather than symbolism and measurable competence rather than ideological rhetoric. Governments must govern populations that are more educated, more connected and more willing to question authority than at any previous point in human history.

The world is not simply witnessing political unrest. It is experiencing a profound cultural transformation in how human beings understand power, legitimacy and citizenship. The old social contract is under unprecedented strain; a new one has yet to emerge. Whether this transition leads to democratic renewal, institutional reform, greater authoritarianism or prolonged instability will depend upon decisions made in the coming decades. History suggests that societies capable of adapting peacefully tend to flourish. Those that ignore deep structural grievances often face recurring crises.

The writer is a published anthropologist. She has taught at the International Islamic University,Islamabad, and National University of Medical Sciences. She is also a Red Cross/ Red Crescent Youths as Agents of Behavioural Change trainer