The Ice shooting in Minnesota in just another example of how divided and limited in our capacity to critically think our nation has become. The issue is dominated by the narratives representing two ideologies guiding and controlling the American mind, with little room for any perspectives outside of this box. The so-called conservative right, who for whatever reason cannot seem to accept the idea that their president isn’t who they thought, views this shooting as a legitimate act of self-defense. Perhaps it is, however, there are questions that we should all be asking. The typical argument is that Ice is legitimately enforcing immigration law. Fine, but the woman shot was not an illegal immigrant. She was a protestor. A protestor mind you, that in many ways, we have been programmed to hate because their values, beliefs and attitudes towards our country are so anti-thetical to our own. Conservative commentary on this issue is rife with references to blue-haired liberals and lesbians in an attempt to justify the death of this woman. Who in all reality, isn’t all that different than any of us. She was, after all, an American citizen. The left, of course, has become enraged over this and are taking to the streets in their typical fashion to continue their agitprop tactics. This, undoubtedly, is also a part of the bigger problem. Ever since Obama, and probably earlier, we have witnessed the rise of the professional agitator. Well organized and funded protest movements designed to do little more than create chaos, confusion and discontent. The American patriot has grown very weary of this and have reached a point where violence is an acceptable answer. Very few people are stepping outside the bounds of these two perspectives and discussing this incident for what it is. Another useful distraction meant to keep us fighting among ourselves while the AI surveillance system they are ready to impose on all of us, steadily advances. People are looking for solutions to the many problems we face. The problem is that no one will accept what the bigger issue is. We are living in a system designed to give the illusion of choice and freedom. There is very little difference between the so-called right and left. The differences that do exist are contrived narratives designed to reinforce the existing beliefs of each respective party, while in the shadows, the same agenda advances. It doesn’t matter if a democrat or republican is in office. The bombs continue to drop, the debt continues to increase, and our liberties continue to go away. Incidents like this shooting aid in that agenda as people become more willing to surrender their freedoms in the name of safety.
“The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is [to the Eastern Establishment] a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, [they believe that] the two parties should be almost identical, so that [they can control the elections] … without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy” (Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, p. 1035).
Doesn’t that quote describe our system better than anything else? Do the political right and left really represent two opposing ideologies in a fight for the heart and soul of our country? Or are they selling cleverly contrived stories tapping into the beliefs of the electorate? I have said this numerous times, but it is worth repeating. Propaganda and persuasion work best when it reflects the pre-existing cognitive biases of the target audience. As long as the American people continue to allow ourselves to be divided by terms such as left or right, or, conservative and liberal, there won’t be any real change. I am not necessarily arguing that the beliefs and opinions of people are not illegitimate. Not at all. Only that those beliefs are thoroughly understood by people highly skilled in crafting persuasive messages that are meant to keep our minds trapped in a particular frame. Cass Sunstein writes in his book Nudge, that people are mindless and passive in their decision making. By framing arguments in terms controlled within a certain “this or that” paradigm, people are forced to make choices within that paradigm. In cases such as the Ice shooting, the “this or that” paradigm is the political right or left. You are either on the side of government, or you are a deranged, blue-haired leftist.
Another point worth repeating is that propaganda is meant to gain acceptance on issues that would otherwise be opposed. I hate to say this but conservatives, under both Trump administrations, have become very accepting of the growth of government power in the name of fighting the left. The entire premise of the conservative ideology has been flipped on its head as patriots have accepted ideas that they would have at one time, definitely opposed. Here is the point though, it all depends on the framing. For instance, there is little chance that the conservative movement would have accepted the idea of heavily armed and masked troops patrolling our streets thirty years ago. When the issue is framed as a way to deal with illegal immigration, it becomes accepted. People, and this is something else that Sunstein alluded to, cannot see the contradictions in their own thinking. Conservatives are usually the first to argue, in the face of any leftist expansion of power, that once government gains power, they rarely give it up. Why would this situation be any different? Why wouldn’t they consider the possibility that the immigration issue is just an excuse to normalize the presence of armed federal troops? The answer to that question is very simple. The situation in our country, after eight years of Obama at the helm, and the prospects of a Hillary Clinton presidency, brought the American conservative to the point of hopelessness. In their moment of frustration and despair, they accepted anything that promised a return to normal.
Any revolutionary change must be proceeded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, and so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and chance the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution. (Alinsky, Rules for Radicals, p. xix)
If there is to be any hope of preserving our country — restoring it back to what was intended — we have to stop accepting everything the government or media tells us. They are telling us what we want to hear with the understanding that propaganda works best when it reflects the cognitive biases of the intended audience. Both sides of the political aisle are working to keep us fighting amongst ourselves, so we don’t notice them working together to advance the same, freedom killing agenda. Take it for what you will, but there is a reason they think we are gullible, and it isn’t because of our robust skepticism.
