The clash of the middle classes is the result of two global trends. One is that in poor countries, the middle class is rapidly expanding. At the same time, in rich countries, the middle class is shrinking, feeling embattled, insecure, and incapable of keeping and defending the standards of living that have characterized a middle-class lifestyle for centuries. That explains, in part, the street demonstrations and riots that we have seen in countries ranging from England to Spain, even Israel, in which people take to the streets fighting and protesting against a variety of issues: inequality, the cost of housing, insecurity, public rage against governments, and all that.

Ironically and paradoxically, in the same way that the decline of the middle class is creating political tensions and frictions in rich countries, the expansion of the middle class in poor countries is also a source of political conflict. That may be paradoxical, but the reality is that these middle classes created expansion and rapid progress, which lead to expectations that very few governments can fulfill at the speed at which they are created. So demands for public services(TUNAOMBA SERIKALI IINGILIE KATI) are soaring, and the capacity of the government to respond to these demands is expanding, too, but at a slower rate.

@Josiah, do you have any examples to show that government capacities are expanding?

And how can government capacities be made to expand at a tolerable rate? How can this rate be determined?

I can find three ideas here:

1. The nation state is mostly responsible for the economy.

2. Bodies politic are being run ineffectively.

3. Running the political entity like a business is the way to go.

Of these, I think only the second is true. All the others are false.

The first isn't true due to globalization, and spread of the internet.

The third is false because these businesses have only thrived when the body politic thrived.

But then, can we live without a body politic?