Politics is a battle of ideas. In America, there are two basic sides, and each side puts forth its candidates vying for votes of the People. At various times, the sides have been identified as Liberals versus Conservatives, the Left versus the Right, Progressives versus Reactionaries, Change versus Tradition, Innovation versus the Status Quo.
The political parties change over time, but the two approaches remain mostly constant: Do we move forward, or remain static? Do we seek, as our Constitution proposes, to become a “more perfect union,” or do we seek to return to a past where conditions seemed more “comfortable”? Blaze trails, or cling to the old ways? Look to the future, or the past?
As part of this battle for votes, both sides have crafted their shorthand framework for how to address issues. Over time, these ways of discussing politics have been called talking points, memes, advocacy, and spin. More severe examples of this biased information have been called propaganda, agitprop, disinformation, counter-information, and brainwashing. Different approaches to deceptive reporting are used. “Framing” concerns from what “angle” a story covered. “Exclusionary coverage” selects what stories to cover, and what to ignore. Other techniques range from exaggeration to selective half-truths to gaslighting to outright lying.
Our challenge is to be informed voters, and to be able to sort TRUTH from FICTION. Politics today is a virtual minefield of things we are being asked to believe, in order to support “our side” in the battle. Never before in our history has the public had access to so many information sources. Endless cable and satellite TV channels, 24-hour news broadcasting, the Internet, our phones, blogs and podcasts and blast e-mails. It’s beyond overwhelming.
A media belief is that if you can control the “news” narrative, you can control the minds of the People, and ultimately the VOTES of the people. How can we know what is TRUE?
A good test is, Are you an information consumer who demands the same level of reality that is required in a courtroom? Do you insist on proof, evidence, examples, cross examination and corroboration before you will believe a narrative? Or have you instead chosen sources of information that are biased in ways you agree with, and will believe whatever these sources tell you based on no factual backup? Do you tend to believe suspicions, speculations, conjectures, conspiracy theories, and unfounded allegations as long as they are aimed at the “other side”? Do you refuse to listen to narratives that challenge your preconceived beliefs?
One hint you might get in this struggle to find TRUTH is if one side or the other disparages and attacks courtrooms, judges, attorneys general, witnesses, law enforcement, and public servants as a “deep state” conspiracy in itself, and therefore there is NO WAY to know TRUTH … Ergo, your only choice is to believe what your chosen information sources tell you, without question. This is how tyranny takes hold.
Submitted by Jeff Harrison.
