I think the role of government will become more administrative, smaller and more localised, like a service provider for geographical regions. For example, apartment buildings have "body corporates" that take care of admin issues with the building and hire contractors to fix these issues. I think a government will do that stuff but for geographical regions.

Since people can custody their own wealth and the government cannot print money, there's less of an opportunity for crony capitalism because the money can't be created out of thin air and misallocated by governments or fund managers to these corporates. And without the power to print money and set interest rates, governments have less power to dictate policies so corporates are less likely to kiss government ass and buy favour with political donations.

Re education of technology - I wouldn't underestimate our ability to learn about new technology (eg many people can use and own a cellphone nowadays regardless of wealth or education status). Technology always gets cheaper and more accessible. Bitcoin's user experience will continue to get better and more accessible.

Re unfair distribution - those who own more Bitcoin don't have the ability to manipulate Bitcoin in their favour. But like every wealthy individual, they do have a higher ability to shape the world with their wealth. They could also lose their money, not spend it or spend it. If they lose it or not spend it, everyone's Bitcoin becomes more valuable because there's less supply circulating. If they spend it, the economy grows and everyone's Bitcoin becomes more valuable because there's more productivity (more goods and services being produced and consumed, but the same amount of Bitcoin in circulation). Good outcome for the rest of the economy either way.