Goverment drama

 With a little critical thinking and emotional intelligence, I came to a sobering conclusion—ironically, just after voting for Obama: 

•  Politics, the news, and the illusion of being "informed" weren’t adding anything positive to my life. 
• Instead, they increased my anxiety and irritability.  

 And I’m not alone. Studies have shown this is a common response. After all, “If it bleeds, it leads,” right? 

 I began approaching politics the same way I used to watch scary movies as a child: 

Peering nervously around a doorframe against my own will and the consent of the adults

“Speech is a powerful lord" ~Gorgias of Leontini 5th century BCE. a famous ancient Greek sophist and orator,    argued that emotion, rhythm, and clever framing matter more than truth in persuasion. 

 “If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, it is now possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without them knowing it.” ~Edward Bernays  "father of public relations," was a master of psychological manipulation through media. His tactics were rooted in crowd psychology, Freudian psychoanalysis (he was Freud’s nephew), and an unshakable belief that the masses needed to be guided by an informed elite. Hitlers inspiration for his propaganda (US) Let’s break down his core tactics.

 Obama repealed the Smith-Mundt Act, which prohibited the U.S. government from using propaganda on its own citizens. 

Then (Bernays):

• Marketed cigarettes to women as a symbol of liberation ("Torches of Freedom").
   

Now:

• Slogans like "Trust the Science" in COVID messaging often bypassed nuance and dissenting expert opinions.
   
• "Defund the Police" used emotional footage of police brutality to rally support, while downplaying the complex social consequences.
   

✅ Effect: Bypasses reason, hijacks emotion, and reframes policy debates into moral imperatives.

Then:

• Bernays hired doctors to say bacon was healthy or dentists to say people should eat more sugarless gum.
   

Now:

• Fact-checking organizations (like PolitiFact or Snopes), often portrayed as neutral, are funded by political or ideological actors.
   
• Health experts with media airtime were often cherry-picked during COVID to align with messaging.
   

✅ Effect: Creates illusion of consensus. Dismisses dissent as misinformation even when scientifically valid.

Then:

• Plant stories across radio, newspapers, and newsreels until it became common knowledge.
   

Now:

• Every mainstream outlet repeats the same phrases:
   "Threat to our democracy"
  "Baseless claims"
  "Insurrection"
  "Misinformation"
  
   
• Repetition of trigger terms to implant associative fear or virtue (e.g., “climate crisis,” “systemic racism”).
   

✅ Effect: Repetition solidifies perception. Questioning becomes taboo or dangerous.

Then:

• Organized visually striking stunts (e.g., women smoking in parades).
   

Now:

• Rainbow flags at embassies, kneeling in kente cloth, or Biden’s “Soul of the Nation” speech lit in red like a dystopian set—intended to project strong symbolic narratives.
   

✅ Effect: Uses visuals to cue emotion, bypass analysis, and signal loyalty/virtue.

Then:

• Staged parades and press stunts to manufacture public opinion.
   

Now:

• Scripted town halls, activist-organized school walkouts, or highly produced "spontaneous protests" often get coordinated media coverage before they even happen.
   
• For example, the Women’s March after Trump’s election was a pre-planned media event with corporate sponsors and viral distribution, not a raw public outcry.
   

✅ Effect: Media frames events before public forms its own opinion.

Then:

• Use controlled media to tell the public what to think is “normal” or “necessary.”
   

Now:

• Big Tech partners with government (e.g., Twitter Files revelations) to suppress dissenting views under the guise of safety or misinformation.
   
• Phrases like "Our democracy is at stake" engineer consent for censorship, investigations, or emergency powers.
   

✅ Effect: Reduces the Overton window (range of acceptable thought), and ensures “public” support for top-down policy.

 Meanwhile, the most important issues—the ones that actually impact our lives—go without outrage:

•  Elite criminals face no justice. 
• Conspiracies are dismissed or buried. 
• The media provides distractions and silence—an effective cover-up.  

And yet:

 We the people hold immense power—when united. Where is the collective action? Where is the outrage that even a preschooler could understand is needed? When people work together, anything is possible. 

In my view, many individuals on the political left are guided by strong moral intentions and a genuine concern for social welfare. However, their leadership, broadly speaking, appears either willfully ignorant or, more troublingly, actively malevolent.

The term “white privilege,” regardless of its empirical validity or an individual’s willingness to acknowledge it, may unintentionally reinforce psychological hierarchies. Subconsciously, the framing of the term can serve to elevate white identity, irrespective of context or intent.

The underlying narrative at play is psychological in nature.
A negative mindset—rooted in the belief that one is inherently less capable because of who they are, for whatever reason, and therefore in need of assistance—is more likely to foster learned helplessness and decrease the likelihood of success. This belief system, framed as an “uphill battle” or an “us vs. them” dynamic, may in fact be more damaging to a community than the often exaggerated portrayals of discrimination broadcast through media. While such portrayals may appear reflective of reality, they are frequently dramatized. Nonetheless, they engage the brain’s reticular activating system, leading to hyper-focused attention on perceived injustices—regardless of whether they are directly experienced.

Discrimination does exist—this is a fact—and it must be addressed when clearly present. However, what seems more constructive is promoting a growth mindset: the belief that, with effort and perseverance, anyone’s ability to adapt and overcome challenges is not only possible but inevitable. 

Stereotype Threat 

1999 research conducted by Steven J. Spencer, Claude M. Steele, and Diane M. Quinn,

• Impact of Stereotype Activation: When women were informed that a math test had previously shown gender differences favoring men, they performed worse than their male counterparts. Conversely, when told the test showed no gender differences, women's performance matched that of men.​

• But when no stereotype is mentioned, their scores are equal.

• Expectation influences ability. 

 STEREOTYPE THREAT AND THE INTELLECTUAL TEST PERFORMANCE OF AFRICAN AMERICANS

Researchers: Claude M. Steele and Joshua Aronson
•  Black college students underperformed on verbal tests when told the test measured intelligence.
•  When the same test was described as non-diagnostic (not measuring ability), the performance gap between Black and white students decreased.
•  The difference in performance was attributed to stereotype threat — the anxiety or concern about confirming negative stereotypes about one's group.
•  Demonstrated that psychological factors (like stereotype awareness) can significantly influence test performance
•  Published in: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 

"Why do the poor stay poor?
Spare me the fairy tales spun by politicians, activists, and media clowns. Poverty isn't a steel trap welded shut by systemic racism, predatory capitalism, or a government too tightfisted to care. That's a sappy yarn—good for rallying votes, raking in donations, or filling airtime with sanctimony.

The brutal truth cuts deeper and bleeds harder. Poverty—especially the generational kind that chains families to misery for decades—thrives on choices, warped incentives, and boneheaded policies that pay people to fail while punishing the virtues that could lift them out.

Families shatter. Schools crumble. Work ethic dissolves.
We've engineered a machine that greases the slide into dependency—then calls it compassion.

History and data don’t just poke holes in the excuses.
They torch them."

~Thomas Sowell

the music industry has systematically elevated content aligned with “thug life” narratives, often at the expense of messages rooted in uplift and empowerment. This concern is magnified by music’s well-documented ability to shape emotional states and cognitive patterns; lyrical content, when combined with rhythm and repetition, becomes neurologically embedded, especially among youth. The emotional resonance of music strengthens its persuasive power, making it a potent tool for influencing identity, behavior, and worldview. Allegations have also emerged about a deeper conspiracy involving music executives, private prison investors, and potential CIA ties . A widely circulated (though unverified) letter from a purported music industry insider claims that, in the early 1990s, key stakeholders conspired to promote music that would glorify crime and self-destruction—thereby increasing incarceration rates and driving profit within the prison-industrial complex. Whether fact or fiction, the plausibility of such a narrative is underscored by the observable suppression of socially conscious artists and the simultaneous promotion of destructive stereotypes. Artists like  Tupac Shakur, Dead Prez, Lupe Fiasco,  Immortal Technique, KRS-One, Talib Kweli, Killer Mike, Public Enemy, Sage Francis, Lauryn Hill, Kendrick Lamar, and Ice Cube have all spoken out against the pressures to conform to these narrow portrayals, highlighting an ongoing internal resistance within the genre itself.

 Then you add in to the mix the goverment was flooding the inner cities with crack cocaine its not a pretty picture. 

   I'm not against government assistance or helping those in need—my own history is proof enough. Sometimes people fall on hard times and need a little financial help, which can be crucial and provide real benefits. Most of the time, however, money alone doesn’t solve the root problems. Giving money is easy, but it often lacks the effort and personal involvement required to genuinely address the deeper concerns an individual may truly need support with. 

The same Democrats who created the welfare system for a community that, according to Thomas Sowell’s data, had been thriving 30 to 40 years earlier also played a leading role in the eugenics movement that inspired Hitler. Planned Parenthood was originally created with eugenic intentions—not out of concern for women’s rights. This was not a secret. Margaret Sanger, the woman who pioneered Planned Parenthood, was openly racist and even honored by the KKK and admired by Hitler. A fact Hillary Clinton was almost certainly aware of when she accepted the Margaret Sanger Award.

• Elite criminals face no justice. 
• Conspiracies are dismissed or buried. 
• The media provides distractions and silence—an effective cover-up.  

And yet: We the people hold immense power—when united. Where is the collective action? Those who have are best intrest are us. When people work together, anything is possible. 

Don’t believe everything you see on TV—it reeks of ignorance. When either side lacks the maturity to recognize and build upon the successes of a previous administration, or to admit the failures of their own party, it becomes a childish battle—about as useful as rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic as it sinks.

Is it just a coincidence that all these activists and so-called social justice warriors only parrot the topics that mainstream media deems important? They claim to hate the “1%” and fight against it, yet they themselves are the 1%—at least in the context of global wealth. But I’m sure their woke ideology makes them the responsible kind of 1%—the kind that definitely doesn’t support the slave labor used to produce many of our clothes, smartphones, batteries, or chocolate.

That, I believe, is what we now call virtue signaling.