A network of exceedingly wealthy individuals and organizations have channeled their vast fortunes into influencing American politics, policy, and public opinion — they’ve formed a wealth cult. And they’ve leveraged that cult and its considerable fortune to influence and in many ways dramatically transform American politics.
The term “dark money” refers to political spending meant to influence the decision-making and critical thinking of the public and lawmakers where the source of the money is not disclosed. This lack of transparency makes it challenging to trace the influence back to its origins, hence the term “dark.”
The wealth cult has funded disinformation campaigns, the spread of conspiracy theories, created fake social movements through astroturfing, enabled violent extremists to attack their country’s capitol, cruelly deprived vulnerable people (especially immigrants, poor people, and women) of the kind of state aid granted generously throughout the developed world, bribed regulators, rigged elections, crashed economies, and on and on in service of their extremist free market ideology beliefs.
They believe in “makers and takers,” or Mudsill Theory, as it was once called by pedophile and racist Senator and slavery enthusiast James Henry Hammond. Some people were born to serve others, they say. Hierarchies are natural, they claim. Wealthy men should make all the decisions — because that’s what’s best for everyone, they say in paternalistic tones.
Faced with these realities and the census projection of a majority minority population in the United States by the year 2045, the Republican right-wing is struggling to keep piecing together a voting base that can achieve victories in electoral politics. The GOP is now 3 cults in a trenchcoat, having been hollowed out and twisted to the point of trying desperately to hold increasingly extreme factions together for another election cycle in which they can try to capture power forever through gerrymandering and other anti-democratic election engineering — or at least long enough to erase the evidence of their criminal behavior during the Trump years culminating in a coup attempt on January 6, 2021.
Led by Charles Koch et al, the mostly aging, Boomer crowd who controls much of the US government either directly or indirectly as a donor or operative is starting to panic for one reason or another: the fear of death looming, existential worries about thwarted or unmet ambition, economic turn of the wheel starting to leave their fortunes in decline (with inflation as a common boogie man since the Wall Street Putsch of the 1930s). Much of this crowd inherited the free market ideological zeal of the Austrian School of economics (later, trickle down economics) from their fathers along with their trust fund fortunes that some have squandered (Trump), tread water with (Coors, Scaife), or grown (Koch, DeVos).
Christian nationalism, a complex and multifaceted ideology, intersects the realms of faith, politics, and cultural identity. At its core, it seeks to fuse Christian and national identities, advocating for policies and governance that reflect a particular interpretation of Christian values as foundational to the national identity and public life.
This movement is not monolithic; it varies widely in its manifestations and intensity, ranging from a general preference for a Christian cultural ambiance to more extreme calls for the implementation of laws that strictly adhere to certain Christian doctrines. Despite its name, Christian nationalism is less about religious faith per se and more about leveraging religious identity as a marker of belonging and legitimacy within the national narrative and overall political power structure of the United States and elsewhere. In some ways, Christian nationalism doesn’t actually seem very Christian at all.
False claims of national origin
The Christian nationalists of America today present a false narrative surrounding the origin story of the United States as part of their fundamental claim to power. Contrary to their claims of America as a Christian nation, the Framers of the Constitution took great pains to separate religious authority from democratic governance — having seen the deleterious effects of state imposed religion by the Church of England. In fact, one of the primary reasons many original American colonists left their native homeland was to flee the mandates of the church and seek the religious freedom to worship in their own ways, whether Puritanism, Lutheranism, or other Protestant sect.
Part of a broader pattern of right-wing Big Lies, the idea that the Founders intended anything other than a strong separation of church and state belongs in the realm of propaganda, not in the realm of truth. Moreover, Jesus himself seemed to be quite allergic to the desire for accumulating political power — famously saying, “render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s” in Matthew 22:21. The imposition of Christian nationalism in America would destroy the very religious freedom the United States was actually founded upon.
10 Commandments — The 10 Commandments are a set of biblical principles relating to ethics and worship, which play a fundamental role in Judaism and Christianity. They include directives on worship, morality, and human relationships, as outlined in the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy in the Bible.
acolytes — Acolytes are individuals who assist in religious ceremonies, particularly in Christian liturgical traditions, performing duties such as carrying processional crosses, lighting candles, and assisting with preparations for communion. Their role is to support the clergy and enhance the ceremonial aspects of worship.
affirmative action — Affirmative action refers to policies and measures designed to increase opportunities for underrepresented groups in areas such as education and employment, aiming to redress historical injustices and discrimination. It seeks to promote equality by considering factors like race, gender, or ethnicity in decision-making processes.
American exceptionalism — American exceptionalism is the idea that the United States is inherently different from other nations, often due to its unique historical evolution, democratic institutions, and national ethos. This concept suggests that America has a special role to play in human history and global affairs.
apostles — the primary disciples of Jesus Christ in Christianity, chosen by Him to spread His teachings. The term traditionally refers to the Twelve Apostles in the New Testament, who were sent out to proclaim the message of Jesus across the world.
apostates — individuals who renounce or abandon their faith or religious beliefs. This term is often used in a religious context to describe someone who has turned away from the religious faith they once professed.
baptism — a Christian sacrament of initiation and purification, symbolizing the believer’s spiritual cleansing, rebirth, and admission into the Christian community. It is typically performed by sprinkling water on the head or by immersion, signifying the washing away of sins and the individual’s commitment to follow Jesus Christ.
Biblical values — the moral and ethical principles derived from the teachings and narratives found in the Bible. These values include love, justice, compassion, humility, and integrity, guiding the behavior and decision-making of believers.
Biblical worldview — a way of understanding and interpreting the world from the perspective of biblical teachings, seeing all aspects of life through the lens of Scripture. It encompasses beliefs about God, morality, human nature, and the purpose of life, influencing how individuals perceive and interact with the world around them.
born-again — within Christian nationalism, being born-again is not just a private spiritual matter but also a call to action to bring about a nation that aligns with specific Christian principles. The born-again experience is thus politicized, serving as a catalyst for engaging in activities aimed at shaping national identity, policy, and governance in accordance with a particular Christian worldview.
Calvinism — a major branch of Protestantism that follows the theological tradition and forms of Christian practice set down by John Calvin and other Reformation-era theologians. It emphasizes the sovereignty of God, the doctrine of predestination, and the total depravity of humans, among other key points.
cheap grace — cheap grace refers to the concept of receiving forgiveness and moral absolution without any personal cost or commitment to ethical transformation. It’s often criticized for reducing the complexities of faith and morality to a simplistic transaction, undermining the depth and rigor of spiritual practice.
βChristian journalismβ — refers to the practice of journalism within a Christian framework, emphasizing reporting, analysis, and commentary that align with Christian values and perspectives. It aims to provide news and insights on various issues, including moral, ethical, and social matters, from a Christian viewpoint.
Christian Reconstructionism — Christian Reconstructionism is a theological movement within conservative Calvinist Christianity, advocating for the application of a particular interpretation of biblical law to all areas of life, including civil governance. It promotes the idea that society should be reconstructed along biblical lines, with a significant emphasis on the Old Testament’s legal codes.
City Upon a Hill — The phrase “city upon a hill” is often invoked in conservative discourse to emphasize America’s role as a beacon of freedom, democracy, and moral leadership for the world. Originating from a sermon by Puritan leader John Winthrop in 1630, the term has been adapted to advocate for a vision of American exceptionalism and the importance of upholding traditional values.
clergy — individuals who are ordained for religious duties in Christian and other religious traditions. They perform various spiritual functions, including leading worship services, performing sacraments, and providing pastoral care to the congregation.
communion — Communion, also known as the Eucharist in some Christian denominations, is a sacrament that commemorates the Last Supper of Jesus Christ with His disciples. It involves the partaking of bread and wine (or grape juice) as symbols of Jesus’ body and blood, signifying participation in the divine grace.
Conservative Resurgence — historical period in the late 1970s and early 80s that started to reverse the trend backwards from the political and economic philosophies of the New Deal, and away from church liberalization efforts and towards a more hardline, fundamentalist approach complete with purges of moderates
conversions — In a religious context, conversions refer to the process by which an individual adopts a new religious belief, often resulting in a change of affiliation from one religion to another. It typically involves a personal experience of transformation and acceptance of the new faith’s tenets.
culture war — The term “culture war” refers to the ideological and social conflicts that arise when different groups clash over issues like religion, morality, politics, and social norms. These battles often manifest in debates over topics such as LGBTQ+ rights, abortion, immigration, and the role of government, and they can deeply influence public opinion and policy.
“defense of marriage” — The term “defense of marriage” often refers to political and social efforts to uphold the traditional definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman. It is frequently used in debates over the legal recognition of same-sex marriages and related legal and policy issues.
demons — In Christian theology, demons are considered malevolent spiritual beings opposed to God and humanity. They are often associated with temptation, possession, and various forms of evil, and are believed to be fallen angels led by Satan.
End Times — The End Times, also known as the eschaton in theological terms, refer to a future period described in biblical prophecy where world events reach a final climax, leading to the return of Jesus Christ, the final judgment, and the establishment of God’s kingdom. Different Christian traditions have various interpretations of the signs, events, and timing related to the End Times.
family values — “family values” often refers to a set of traditional beliefs that emphasize the importance of the nuclear family, marital fidelity, and conservative religious principles. These values are seen as the bedrock of a stable society and are often contrasted with more progressive or liberal social norms.
flyover country — a colloquial term often used to describe the central regions of the United States perceived as less significant or overlooked by coastal elites. It implies a region primarily flown over by air travelers from one coast to the other, with the insinuation that these areas are less culturally or politically important.
fundamentalism — originally referred to a movement within American Protestantism that emerged in the early 20th century, emphasizing a literal interpretation of the Bible and adherence to its fundamental doctrines. The term has since broadened to describe any religious movement across various faiths that holds to strict adherence to foundational principles and often rejects modernism.
The Golden Rule — treat others how you wish to be treated; Jesus referred to this teaching as his “Greatest Commandment”
The Great Awakening — a series of religious revivals that swept through the American colonies in the 18th century, marked by a renewed enthusiasm for religious experience, personal piety, and evangelism. It significantly influenced American Protestantism and the country’s social and cultural landscape.
groupthink — a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people when the desire for harmony or conformity results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcome. It is characterized by the suppression of dissenting viewpoints, leading to a lack of critical evaluation of decisions.
holy ghost — one of the three persons of the Holy Trinity; believed to be the active presence of God in the world today. The Holy Ghost is often associated with guiding believers, empowering them with spiritual gifts, and serving as a comforter or advocate.
holy spirit — considered the third person of the Trinity in Christian theology, alongside God the Father and God the Son (Jesus Christ). The Holy Spirit is believed to be the presence of God active in the world, guiding, inspiring, and empowering believers, and playing a central role in their spiritual life and growth.
homeschooling — an educational approach where parents choose to educate their children at home instead of sending them to traditional public or private schools. This method allows for a personalized education, often tailored to the child’s learning pace, interests, and values, and can include various educational philosophies and curricula.
hypocrisy — the act of pretending to hold beliefs, attitudes, virtues, or feelings that one does not actually possess. It is often highlighted in moral and religious discussions as a vice, where an individual’s actions contradict their professed values, demonstrating a lack of integrity or moral consistency.
i360 — Charles Koch‘s massive database of 230 million voters and their intimate demographic data, deployed for use in a wide range of Republican campaigns
The Johnson Amendment — The Johnson Amendment is a provision in the U.S. tax code, enacted in 1954, that prohibits nonprofit organizations, including churches and other religious organizations, from endorsing or opposing political candidates. It aims to maintain the separation of church and state by restricting the political involvement of tax-exempt entities.
Kingdom action — “Kingdom action” refers to activities or initiatives undertaken by Christians to advance the kingdom of God on Earth, in alignment with the teachings and example of Jesus Christ. This can include evangelism, social justice efforts, charitable works, and other forms of ministry aimed at reflecting God’s love and righteousness in the world.
liturgy — Liturgy refers to the prescribed set of rituals, prayers, and ceremonies that make up the formal public worship in religious traditions, particularly in Christianity. It serves as a structured framework that guides the communal expression of faith and devotion.
love thy neighbor — “Love thy neighbor” is a fundamental ethical injunction in many religious traditions, emphasizing the importance of treating others with kindness, compassion, and respect, akin to one’s self. In Christianity, it is second only to loving God and is central to the teachings of Jesus Christ.
“moral decay” — a term often used to describe a perceived decline in the ethical standards, values, and behavior of a society, suggesting a move away from traditional morals towards increased vice and immorality. It is frequently cited in cultural and religious critiques of contemporary social trends.
the βnatural familyβ — used within certain ideological frameworks to describe a family unit based on heterosexual marriage, with clear gender roles and biological offspring. It is often promoted as the foundational building block of society and a standard for raising children.
The New International Version (NIV) Bible — The New International Version (NIV) Bible is a contemporary English translation of the Bible, first published in 1978, with a focus on a balance between word-for-word and thought-for-thought translation techniques. It is one of the most popular and widely used modern translations of the Bible.
the New Right — refers to a conservative political movement that emerged in the United States in the late 20th century, advocating for free market principles, a strong national defense, traditional family values, and a reduction in government intervention in the economy. It played a significant role in reshaping the Republican Party.
The New Testament — The New Testament is the second part of the Christian biblical canon, consisting of texts that describe the life, teachings, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, as well as the early Christian Church’s teachings and history. It includes the Gospels, Acts, Epistles, and Revelation.
The Old Testament — the first part of the Christian Bible, comprising religious texts that are also sacred in Judaism. It includes a collection of books that cover the creation of the world, the history of Israel, laws, and prophetic writings, laying the foundation for Christian and Jewish religious beliefs.
nuns — women who have taken solemn vows and dedicated their lives to religious service within a monastic order in Christianity. They live a life of prayer, contemplation, and community service, often within a convent or monastery.
paleoconservatives — proponents of a political philosophy emphasizing tradition, limited government, civil society, and non-interventionist foreign policies, often advocating for a return to older conservative values and skepticism towards globalism and neoconservatism.
party of character — The term “party of character” often refers to a political group or movement that emphasizes moral integrity, ethical conduct, and virtuous leadership as central principles. It asserts that character and personal ethics are crucial for public officials and the governance of society.
pastors — ordained leaders within Christian churches who are responsible for guiding the congregation, preaching, administering sacraments, and providing pastoral care. They play a key role in the spiritual life and education of their community members.
pious — Pious describes someone who is devoutly religious and deeply committed to the observance of their faith’s rituals and moral principles. It implies a sincere and earnest approach to religious practice and a life led in accordance with one’s spiritual convictions.
predestination — the Calvinist concept that God has chosen individuals for salvation prior to their birth
priests — In many religions, priests are ordained figures authorized to perform sacred rituals and provide spiritual leadership to the community. In Christianity, particularly within Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and some Anglican and Lutheran traditions, priests administer sacraments, lead worship, and offer pastoral care.
proselytizing — Proselytizing refers to the act of attempting to convert someone to a particular religion, belief system, or ideology. It often involves persuasive techniques and may be carried out through various means such as one-on-one conversations, literature distribution, or public speaking.
Prosperity Gospel — The Prosperity Gospel is a controversial theological belief that financial blessing and physical well-being are always the will of God for them, and that faith, positive speech, and donations to religious causes will increase one’s material wealth. Critics argue it often exploits vulnerable believers.
Rapture — In Christian eschatology, the Rapture is a future event where believers in Christ will be caught up from Earth to meet the Lord in the air, preceding the tribulation period and Second Coming of Christ. Interpretations of the timing and nature of the Rapture vary among Christians.
received wisdom — refers to ideas, principles, or knowledge that are traditionally accepted and passed down through generations without being questioned or critically examined. It often pertains to established norms or beliefs in society or within specific communities.
religious freedom / religious liberty — Religious freedom or liberty is the principle that supports the freedom of an individual or community, in public or private, to manifest religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship, and observance without government interference or restriction.
“right to work” — statutes in some U.S. states that prohibit union security agreements between companies and workers’ unions. Under these laws, employees in unionized workplaces cannot be compelled to join the union or pay regular union dues, even if they benefit from the collective bargaining agreements.
sacrament — In Christianity, a sacrament is a rite recognized as of particular importance and significance. Different Christian traditions hold varying views on the number and nature of sacraments, but they are generally seen as means of grace. Common sacraments include baptism and communion.
“school choice” — refers to policies that allow parents to choose their children’s educational pathways, including public, charter, private, and home schooling options. It’s based on the idea that providing various educational options can improve the quality of education by fostering competition.
Second Vatican Council — The Second Vatican Council, or Vatican II, was an ecumenical council of the Roman Catholic Church held from 1962 to 1965. It marked a significant shift in liturgical practices, ecclesiastical approach to the modern world, and the promotion of ecumenism, updating the church’s role in the contemporary world.
sermon — an oration or lecture by a preacher (often a religious leader) intended to provide moral or spiritual guidance, typically based on a passage from the Bible. Sermons are a central part of Christian worship services.
seven mountains dominionism; 7D — Christian movement that advocates for Christian influence in seven major spheres of society: Religion, Family, Education, Government, Media, Arts & Entertainment, and Business. The goal is to bring about societal transformation in accordance with biblical principles.
soft coup dβetat — refers to a non-violent overthrow of a government or significant change in power structures, achieved through non-traditional means such as legal challenges, political maneuvering, or psychological operations rather than direct military action.
Telecommunications Act of 1996 — a comprehensive law in the United States that overhauled telecommunications regulation. It aimed to deregulate the broadcasting market, encourage competition, and promote the rapid deployment of new telecommunications technologies.
televangelism — the use of television broadcasts to spread Christian religious teachings. Televangelists often appeal to viewers for financial donations and may be associated with charismatic preaching and the Prosperity Gospel.
theoconservatives — Theoconservatives, or “theocons,” are conservatives who advocate for the integration of traditional religious values into public policy and government. They emphasize the role of faith in political life and often champion causes related to moral and social issues.
“traditional marriage” — typically refers to a socially recognized and legally sanctioned union between one man and one woman. Advocates for this definition often oppose the legalization of same-sex marriage, arguing for the preservation of historical and religious norms.
War on Christmas — a term used by some to describe perceived attempts to minimize or eliminate public expression of Christmas traditions, symbols, and expressions in secular or public spaces, arguing that such efforts undermine Christian values and cultural heritage.
The “repetition effect” is a potent psychological phenomenon and a common propaganda device. This technique operates on the principle that repeated exposure to a specific message or idea increases the likelihood of its acceptance as truth or normalcy by an individual or the public. Its effectiveness lies in its simplicity and its exploitation of a basic human cognitive bias: the more we hear something, the more likely we are to believe it.
Historical context
The repetition effect has been used throughout history, but its most notorious use was by Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party in Germany. Hitler, along with his Propaganda Minister, Joseph Goebbels, effectively employed this technique to disseminate Nazi ideology and promote antisemitism. In his autobiography “Mein Kampf,” Hitler wrote about the importance of repetition in reinforcing the message and ensuring that it reached the widest possible audience. He believed that the constant repetition of a lie would eventually be accepted as truth.
Goebbels echoed this sentiment, famously stating, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” The Nazi regime used this strategy in various forms, including in speeches, posters, films, and through controlled media. The relentless repetition of anti-Semitic propaganda, the glorification of the Aryan race, and the demonization of enemies played a crucial role in the establishment and maintenance of the Nazi regime.
Psychological basis
The effectiveness of the repetition effect is rooted in cognitive psychology. This bias is known as the “illusory truth effect,” where repeated exposure to a statement increases its perceived truthfulness. The phenomenon is tied to the ease with which familiar information is processed. When we hear something repeatedly, it becomes more fluent to process, and our brains misinterpret this fluency as a signal for truth.
Modern era usage
The transition into the modern era saw the repetition effect adapting to new media and communication technologies. In the age of television and radio, political figures and advertisers used repetition to embed messages in the public consciousness. The rise of the internet and social media has further amplified the impact of this technique. In the digital age, the speed and reach of information are unprecedented, making it easier for false information to be spread and for the repetition effect to be exploited on a global scale.
Political campaigns, especially in polarized environments, often use the repetition effect to reinforce their messages. The constant repetition of slogans, talking points, and specific narratives across various platforms solidifies these messages in the public’s mind, regardless of their factual accuracy.
Ethical considerations and countermeasures
The ethical implications of using the repetition effect are significant, especially when it involves spreading disinformation or harmful ideologies. It raises concerns about the manipulation of public opinion and the undermining of democratic processes.
To counteract the repetition effect, media literacy and critical thinking are essential. Educating the public about this psychological bias and encouraging skepticism towards repeated messages can help mitigate its influence. Fact-checking and the promotion of diverse sources of information also play a critical role in combating the spread of falsehoods reinforced by repetition.
Repetition effect: A key tool of propaganda
The repetition effect is a powerful psychological tool in the arsenal of propagandists and communicators. From its historical use by Hitler and the fascists to its continued relevance in the digital era, this technique demonstrates the profound impact of repeated messaging on public perception and belief.
While it can be used for benign purposes, such as in advertising or reinforcing positive social behaviors, its potential for manipulation and spreading misinformation cannot be understated. Understanding and recognizing the repetition effect is crucial in developing a more discerning and informed approach to the information we encounter daily.
The term “alternative facts” gained widespread attention on January 22, 2017, when Kellyanne Conway, then-Counselor to President Donald Trump, used it during a “Meet the Press” interview. Conway was defending White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer’s false statements about the attendance numbers at Trump’s presidential inauguration the day before.
When challenged by the interviewer, who cited several facts indicating a much smaller crowd size relative to President Obama‘s inauguration, Conway asserted that Spicer was offering “alternative facts” to the media reports, which suggested a lower attendance compared to previous inaugurations.
Philosophical and Historical Context
The term, while new in its specific phrasing, taps into a long-standing philosophical debate about truth and reality. Historically, the idea that there can be different interpretations of facts has roots in relativism and constructivism.
However, the way “alternative facts” was used implied a more radical departure from the accepted notion of objective facts, tilting towards a post-truth era where the line between truth and falsehood becomes blurred. It indicated an intentional strategy of disseminating disinformation early on in the Trump administration, and articulated it out loud in a way that previous presidents had never done before.
Use in US politics
The use of “alternative facts” in US politics has been controversial and highly debated. Proponents argue that the term simply reflects different perspectives and interpretations of events. Critics, however, see it as an attempt to legitimize falsehoods or misleading information, particularly when used by those in power to contradict evidence and well-established facts.
The term quickly became symbolic of the Trump administration’s relationship with the media and its approach to information dissemination. It was seen as part of a broader strategy that involved discrediting mainstream media as so-called “fake news,” promoting favorable narratives, and challenging the notion of objective truth. It extended the already prevalent right-wing strategy of science denialism into a kind of denialism of reality itself — a dangerous path towards authoritarianism reminiscent of the use of Newspeak in George Orwell’s famous classic dystopian novel, 1984.
Implications for American democracy
The implications of the widespread use of “alternative facts” for American democracy are profound and multifaceted:
Erosion of Trust: The concept challenges the role of a free press and fact-checking institutions in democracy. When official statements are at odds with verifiable evidence, it erodes public trust in both the government and the media.
Polarization: It exacerbates political polarization. When people cannot agree on basic facts, finding common ground becomes challenging, leading to a more divided society.
Manipulation and Propaganda: The term can be weaponized for political ends, allowing for manipulation of public opinion and spreading propaganda.
Accountability and Governance: In a democracy, accountability is key. If leaders are seen to use “alternative facts” without consequence, it undermines democratic governance and the expectation that leaders are truthful and transparent.
Public Discourse and Decision Making: Accurate information is crucial for informed decision making by the electorate. When false information is disseminated under the guise of “alternative facts,” it impairs the public’s ability to make informed decisions.
Legal and Ethical Concerns: The concept raises ethical concerns about honesty and integrity in public office and can complicate legal proceedings when factual accuracy is disputed.
The dangers of “reality denial”alternative facts” in political discourse
“Alternative facts,” as a term and a concept, represents more than just a linguistic novelty; it signifies a shift in the landscape of political discourse and the relationship between truth, power, and democracy. Its emergence and use reflect deeper tensions in society about trust, media, and the nature of reality itself. For American democracy, grappling with the implications of this term is not just an intellectual exercise but a necessary endeavor to preserve the integrity of our democratic institutions and public discourse.
It’s one thing to have legitimately different perspectives on the issues. It’s quite another to throw out the founding ideals and Enlightenment principles of rational inquiry, scientific observation, and reality testing altogether. If we cannot agree even on the basic facts of a situation, the ability to arrive at any kind of policy consensus about what to do to solve issues and problems in society that will always occur is deeply impaired — and indeed, our democracy is placed in great peril.
We must recommit fully to the finding of Actual Facts — and put behind us the childish nursing of our favored Alternative Facts.
Shitposting, a term that has seeped into the mainstream of internet culture, is often characterized by the act of posting deliberately provocative, off-topic, or nonsensical content in online communities and on social media. The somewhat vulgar term encapsulates a spectrum of online behavior ranging from harmless, humorous banter to malicious, divisive content.
Typically, a shit-post is defined by its lack of substantive content, its primary goal being to elicit attention and reactions — whether amusement, confusion, or irritation — from its intended audience. Closely related to trolling, shitposting is one aspect of a broader pantheon of bad faith behavior online.
Shit-poster motivations
The demographic engaging in shit-posting is diverse, cutting across various age groups, social strata, and political affiliations. However, it’s particularly prevalent among younger internet users who are well-versed in meme culture and online vernacular. The motivations for shit-posting can be as varied as its practitioners.
Some engage in it for humor and entertainment, seeing it as a form of digital performance art. Others may use it as a tool for social commentary or satire, while a more nefarious subset might employ it to spread disinformation and misinformation, sow discord, and/or harass individuals or groups.
Context in US politics
In the realm of U.S. politics, shit-posting has assumed a significant role in recentelections, especially on platforms like Twitter / X, Reddit, and Facebook. Politicians, activists, and politically engaged individuals often use this tactic to galvanize supporters, mock opponents, or shape public perception. Itβs not uncommon to see political shit-posts that are laden with irony, exaggeration, or out-of-context information, designed to inflame passions or reinforce existing biases — or exploit them.
Recognition and response
Recognizing shit-posting involves a discerning eye. Key indicators include the use of hyperbole, irony, non-sequiturs, and content that seems outlandishly out of place or context. The tone is often mocking or sarcastic. Visual cues, such as memes or exaggerated images, are common.
Responding to shit-posting is a nuanced affair. Engaging with it can sometimes amplify the message, which might be the poster’s intention. A measured approach is to assess the intent behind the post. If it’s harmless humor, it might warrant a light-hearted response or none at all.
For posts that are disinformation or border on misinformation or toxicity, countering with factual information, reporting the content, or choosing not to engage are viable strategies. The key is not to feed into the cycle of provocation and reaction that shit-posting often seeks to perpetuate.
Fighting back
Shit-posting, in its many forms, is a complex phenomenon in the digital age. It straddles the line between being a form of modern-day satire and a tool for misinformation, propaganda, and/or cyberbullying. As digital communication continues to evolve, understanding the nuances of shit-posting β its forms, motivations, and impacts β becomes crucial, particularly in politically charged environments. Navigating this landscape requires a balanced approach, blending awareness, discernment, and thoughtful engagement.
This overview provides a basic understanding of shit-posting, but the landscape is ever-changing, with new forms and norms continually emerging. The ongoing evolution of online communication norms, including phenomena like shit-posting, is particularly fascinating and significant in the broader context of digital culture and political discourse.
Science denialism has a complex and multifaceted history, notably marked by a significant event in 1953 that set a precedent for the tactics of disinformation widely observed in various spheres today, including politics.
The 1953 meeting and the birth of the disinformation playbook
The origins of modern science denial can be traced back to a pivotal meeting in December 1953, involving the heads of the four largest American tobacco companies. This meeting was a response to emerging scientific research linking smoking to lung cancer — a serious existenstial threat to their business model.
Concerned about the potential impact on their business, these industry leaders collaborated with a public relations firm, Hill & Knowlton, to craft a strategy. This strategy was designed not only to dispute the growing evidence about the health risks of smoking, but also to manipulate public perception by creating doubt about the science itself. They created the Tobacco Industry Research Committee (TIRC) as an organization to cast doubt on the established science, and prevent the public from knowing about the lethal dangers of smoking.
And it worked — for over 40 years. The public never formed a consensus on the lethality and addictiveness of nicotine until well into the 1990s, when the jig was finally up and Big Tobacco had to pay a record-breaking $200 billion settlement over their 4 decades of mercilessly lying to the American people following the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) of 1998.
Strategies of the disinformation playbook
This approach laid the groundwork for what is often referred to as the “disinformation playbook.” The key elements of this playbook include creating doubt about scientific consensus, funding research that could contradict or cloud scientific understanding, using think tanks or other organizations to promote these alternative narratives, and influencing media and public opinion to maintain policy and regulatory environments favorable to their interests — whether profit, power, or both.
Over the next 7 decades — up to the present day — this disinformation playbook has been used by powerful special interests to cast doubt, despite scientific consensus, on acid rain, depletion of the ozone layer, the viability of Ronald Reagan‘s Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), and perhaps most notably: the man-made causes of climate change.
Adoption and adaptation in various industries
The tobacco industryβs tactics were alarmingly successful for decades, delaying effective regulation and public awareness of smoking’s health risks. These strategies were later adopted and adapted by various industries and groups facing similar scientific challenges to their products or ideologies. For instance, the fossil fuel industry used similar tactics to cast doubt on global warming — leading to the phenomenon of climate change denialism. Chemical manufacturers have disputed science on the harmful effects of certain chemicals like DDT and BPA.
What began as a PR exercise by Big Tobacco to preserve their fantastic profits once science discovered the deleterious health effects of smoking eventually evolved into a strategy of fomenting science denialism more broadly. Why discredit one single finding of the scientific community when you could cast doubt on the entire process of science itself — as a way of future-proofing any government regulation that might curtail your business interests?
Science denial in modern politics
In recent years, the tactics of science denial have become increasingly prevalent in politics. Political actors, often influenced by corporate interests or ideological agendas, have employed these strategies to challenge scientific findings that are politically inconvenient — despite strong and often overwhelming evidence. This is evident in manufactured “debates” on climate change, vaccine safety, and COVID-19, where scientific consensus is often contested not based on new scientific evidence but through disinformation strategies aimed at sowing doubt and confusion.
The role of digital media and politicization
The rise of social media has accelerated the spread of science denial. The digital landscape allows for rapid dissemination of misinformation and the formation of echo chambers, where groups can reinforce shared beliefs or skepticism, often insulated from corrective or opposing information. Additionally, the politicization of science, where scientific findings are viewed through the lens of political allegiance rather than objective evidence, has further entrenched science denial in modern discourse — as just one aspect of the seeming politicization of absolutely everything in modern life and culture.
Strategies for combatting science denial
The ongoing impact of science denial is profound. It undermines public understanding of science, hampers informed decision-making, and delays action on critical issues like climate change, public health, and environmental protection. The spread of misinformation about vaccines, for instance, has led to a decrease in vaccination rates and a resurgence of diseases like measles.
To combat science denial, experts suggest several strategies. Promoting scientific literacy and critical thinking skills among the general public is crucial. This involves not just understanding scientific facts, but also developing an understanding of the scientific method and how scientific knowledge is developed and validated. Engaging in open, transparent communication about science, including the discussion of uncertainties and limitations of current knowledge, can also help build public trust in science.
Science denial, rooted in the strategies developed by the tobacco industry in the 1950s, has evolved into a significant challenge in contemporary society, impacting not just public health and environmental policy but also the very nature of public discourse and trust in science. Addressing this issue requires a multifaceted approach, including education, transparent communication, and collaborative efforts to uphold the integrity of scientific information.
Climate Change Denial: From Big Tobacco Tactics to Today’s Global Challenge
In the complex narrative of global climate change, one pervasive thread is the phenomenon of climate change denial. This denial isn’t just a refusal to accept the scientific findings around climate change; it is a systematic effort to discredit and cast doubt on environmental realities and the need for urgent action.
Remarkably, the roots of this denial can be traced back to the strategies used by the tobacco industry in the mid-20th century to obfuscate the link between smoking and lung cancer. This companies conspired to create a disinformation campaign against the growing scientific consensus on the manmade nature of climate change, to cast doubt about the link between the burning of fossil fuels and the destruction of the planet’s natural ecosystems — and they succeeded, for over half a century, beginning in 1953.
Origins in big tobacco’s playbook
The origins of climate change denial lie in a well-oiled, public relations machine initially designed by the tobacco industry. When scientific studies began linking smoking to lung cancer in the 1950s, tobacco companies launched an extensive campaign to challenge these findings. Their strategy was not to disprove the science outright but to sow seeds of doubt, suggesting that the research was not conclusive and that more studies were needed. This strategy of manufacturing doubt proved effective in delaying regulatory and public action against tobacco products, for more than 5 decades.
Adoption by climate change deniers
This playbook was later adopted by those seeking to undermine climate science. In the late 20th century, as scientific consensus grew around the human impact on global warming, industries and political groups with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo began to employ similar tactics around lying at scale. They funded research to challenge or undermine climate science, supported think tanks and lobbyists to influence public opinion and policy, and used media outlets to spread a narrative of uncertainty and skepticism.
Political consequences
The political consequences of climate change denial have been profound. In the United States and other countries, it has polarized the political debate over environmental policy, turning what is fundamentally a scientific issue into a partisan one. This politicization has hindered comprehensive national and global policies to combat climate change, as legislative efforts are often stalled by ideological conflicts.
Denial campaigns have also influenced public opinion, creating a significant segment of the population that is skeptical of climate science years after overwhelming scientific consensus has been reached, which further complicates efforts to implement wide-ranging environmental reforms.
Current stakes and global impact
Today, the stakes of climate change denial could not be higher. As the world faces increasingly severe consequences of global warming β including extreme weather events, rising sea levels, and disruptions to ecosystems β the need for decisive action becomes more urgent. Yet, climate change denial continues to impede progress. By casting doubt on scientific consensus, it hampers efforts to build the broad public support necessary for bold environmental policies that may help thwart or mitigate some of the worst disasters.
Moreover, climate change denial poses a significant risk to developing countries, which are often the most vulnerable to climate impacts but the least equipped to adapt. Denialism in wealthier nations can lead to a lack of global cooperation and support needed to address these challenges comprehensively.
Moving forward: acknowledging the science and embracing action
To effectively combat climate change, it is crucial to recognize the roots and ramifications of climate change denial. Understanding its origins in the Big Tobacco disinformation strategy helps demystify the tactics used to undermine environmental science. It’s equally important to acknowledge the role of political and economic interests in perpetuating this denial — oil tycoon Charles Koch alone spends almost $1 billion per election cycle, heavily to climate deniers.
However, there is a growing global movement acknowledging the reality of climate change and the need for urgent action. From international agreements like the Paris Accord to grassroots activism pushing for change, there is a mounting push against the tide of denial.
Climate change denial, with its roots in the Big Tobacco playbook, poses a significant obstacle to global efforts to address environmental challenges. Its political ramifications have stalled critical policy initiatives, and its ongoing impact threatens global cooperation. As we face the increasing urgency of climate change, acknowledging and countering this denial is crucial for paving the way towards a more sustainable and resilient future.
Deep fakes, a term derived from “deep learning” (a subset of AI) and “fake,” refer to highly realistic, AI-generated digital forgeries of real human beings. These sophisticated imitations can be videos, images, or audio clips where the person appears to say or do things they never actually did.
The core technology behind deep fakes is based on machine learning and neural network algorithms. Two competing AI systems work in tandem: one generates the fake content, while the other attempts to detect the forgeries. Over time, as the detection system identifies flaws, the generator learns from these mistakes, leading to increasingly convincing fakes.
Deep fakes in politics
However, as the technology has become more accessible, it’s been used for various purposes, not all of them benign. In the political realm, deep fakes have a potential for significant impact. They’ve been used to create false narratives or manipulate existing footage, making it appear as though a public figure has said or done something controversial or scandalous. This can be particularly damaging in democratic societies, where public opinion heavily influences political outcomes. Conversely, in autocracies, deep fakes can be a tool for propaganda or to discredit opposition figures.
How to identify deep fakes
Identifying deep fakes can be challenging, but there are signs to look out for:
Facial discrepancies: Imperfections in the face-swapping process can result in blurred or fuzzy areas, especially where the face meets the neck and hair. Look for any anomalies in facial expressions or movements that don’t seem natural.
Inconsistent lighting and shadows: AI can struggle to replicate the way light interacts with physical objects. If the lighting or shadows on the face don’t match the surroundings, it could be a sign of manipulation.
Audiovisual mismatches: Often, the audio does not perfectly sync with the video in a deep fake. Watch for delays or mismatches between spoken words and lip movements.
Unusual blinking and breathing patterns: AI can struggle to accurately mimic natural blinking and breathing, leading to unnatural patterns.
Contextual anomalies: Sometimes, the content of the video or the actions of the person can be a giveaway. If it seems out of character or contextually odd, it could be fake.
In democratic societies, the misuse of deep fakes can erode public trust in media, manipulate electoral processes, and increase political polarization. Fake videos can quickly spread disinformation and misinformation, influencing public opinion and voting behavior. Moreover, they can be used to discredit political opponents with false accusations or fabricated scandals.
In autocracies, deep fakes can be a potent tool for state propaganda. Governments can use them to create a false image of stability, prosperity, or unity, or conversely, to produce disinformation campaigns against perceived enemies, both foreign and domestic. This can lead to the suppression of dissent and the manipulation of public perception to support the regime.
Response to deep fakes
The response to the threat posed by deep fakes has been multifaceted. Social media platforms and news organizations are increasingly using AI-based tools to detect and flag deep fakes. There’s also a growing emphasis on digital literacy, teaching the public to critically evaluate the content they consume.
Legal frameworks are evolving to address the malicious use of deep fakes. Some countries are considering legislation that would criminalize the creation and distribution of harmful deep fakes, especially those targeting individuals or designed to interfere in elections.
While deep fakes represent a remarkable technological advancement, they also pose a significant threat to the integrity of information and democratic processes. As this technology evolves, so must our ability to detect and respond to these forgeries. It’s crucial for both individuals and institutions to stay informed and vigilant against the potential abuses of deep fakes, particularly in the political domain. As we continue to navigate the digital age, the balance between leveraging AI for innovation and safeguarding against its misuse remains a key challenge.
The “deep state” conspiracy theory, particularly as it has been emphasized by supporters of former President Donald Trump, alleges the existence of a hidden, powerful network within the U.S. government, working to undermine and oppose Trump’s presidency and agenda. In reality, the epithet is an elaborate way of discrediting the non-partisan civil service personnel who are brought in to government for their expertise and competence, who typically remain in their posts through Presidential transitions regardless of which party is occupying the White House.
Origin of the deep state meme
The term “deep state” originated in Turkey in the 1990s, referring to a clandestine network of military officers and their civilian allies who, it was believed, were manipulating Turkish politics. In the American context, the term was popularized during the Trump administration as a meme, evolving to imply a shadowy coalition — echoing other popular conspiracy theories such as the antisemitic global cabal theory — within the U.S. government, including intelligence agencies, the civil service, and other parts of the bureaucracy.
Main claims
Bureaucratic opposition: The theory posits that career government officials, particularly in intelligence and law enforcement agencies, are systematically working against Trump’s interests. This includes alleged sabotage of his policies and leaking information to the media.
Manipulation of information: Proponents believe that these officials manipulate or withhold information to influence government policy and public opinion against Trump.
Alleged connections with other theories: The deep state theory often intersects with other conspiracy theories, like those surrounding the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election and the impeachment proceedings against Trump. It suggests these events were orchestrated by the deep state to discredit or destabilize his presidency.
Contextual factors
Political polarization: The rise of the deep state theory is partly attributed to the increasing political polarization in the U.S. It serves as a narrative to explain and rally against perceived opposition within the government.
Media influence: Certain media outlets and social media platforms have played a significant role in propagating this theory. It’s often amplified by commentators who support Trump, contributing to its widespread dissemination among his base.
Trump’s endorsement: Trump himself has referenced the deep state, particularly when discussing investigations into his administration or when responding to criticism from within the government.
Criticism and counterarguments to deep state “theory”
Lack of concrete evidence: Critics argue that the deep state theory lacks substantial evidence. They contend that routine government processes, checks and balances, and the separation of powers are mischaracterized as clandestine operations.
Undermining trust in institutions: There’s concern that such theories undermine public trust in vital governmental institutions, particularly those responsible for national security and law enforcement.
Political tool: Detractors view the deep state concept as a political tool used to dismiss or discredit legitimate investigation and opposition.
Impact on governance and society
Influence on supporters: For many Trump supporters, the deep state theory provides an explanatory framework for understanding his political challenges and defeats. It galvanizes his base by portraying him as an outsider battling corrupt, entrenched interests.
Public trust and conspiracism: The theory contributes to a broader erosion of trust in government and institutions, fostering a climate where conspiratorial thinking becomes more mainstream.
Policy implications: Belief in the deep state can impact policy discussions and decisions, as it frames certain government actions and policies as inherently suspect or malicious.
Comparative perspective
Globally, similar theories exist in various forms, often reflecting local political and historical contexts. They typically emerge in situations where there is a distrust of the political establishment and are used to explain perceived injustices or power imbalances.
The deep state conspiracy theory as espoused by Trump’s MAGA movement plays a significant role in current American political discourse, impacting public perception of government, policy debates, and the broader social and political climate. Its lack of verifiable evidence and potential to undermine democratic institutions make it a dangerous propaganda prop applied recklessly by the current GOP frontrunner for the 2024 nomination.
Buckle up, we’re in for a wild ride. Many of the serious scholars of political history and authoritarian regimes are sounding the alarm bells that, although it is a very very good thing that we got the Trump crime family out of the Oval Office, it is still a very very bad thing for America to have so rapidly tilted towards authoritarianism. How did we get here?! How has hyper partisanship escalated to the point of an attempted coup by 126 sitting Republican House Representatives? How has political polarization gotten this bad?
These are some of the resources that have helped me continue grappling with that question, and with the rapidly shifting landscape of information warfare. How can we understand this era of polarization, this age of tribalism? This outline is a work in progress, and I’m planning to keep adding to this list as the tape keeps rolling.
America has had flavors of authoritarianism since its founding, and when fascism came along the right-wing authoritarians ate it up — and deeply wanted the United States to be a part of it. Only after they became social pariahs did they change position to support American involvement in World War II — and some persisted even after the attack of Pearl Harbor.
With Project 2025, Trump now openly threatens fascism on America — and sadly, some are eager for it. The psychology behind both authoritarian leaders and followers is fascinating, overlooked, and misunderstood.
Scholars of authoritarianism
Karen Stenner — Australian political psychologist Karen Stenner found that approximately 1/3 of populations are authoritarian, have an authoritarian personality, or have authoritarian tendencies.
Derrida — the logic of the unconscious; performativity in the act of lying
ketman — Ketman is the psychological concept of concealing one’s true aims, akin to doublethink in Orwell’s 1984, that served as a central theme to Polish dissident CzesΕaw MiΕosz‘s book The Captive Mind about intellectual life under totalitarianism during the Communist post-WWII occupation.
Erich Fromm — coined the term “malignant narcissism” to describe the psychological character of the Nazis. He also wrote extensively about the mindset of the authoritarian follower in his seminal work, Escape from Freedom.
Eric Hoffer — his book The True Believers explores the mind of the authoritarian follower, and the appeal of losing oneself in a totalist movement
Fascism — elevation of the id as the source of truth; enthusiasm for political violence
double highs — social dominators who can “switch” to become followers in certain circumstances
Loyalty; hero worship
Freud = deeply distrustful of hero worship and worried that it indulged people’s needs for vertical authority. He found the archetype of the authoritarian primal father very troubling.
Sometimes our minds play tricks on us. They can convince us that untrue things are true, or vice versa.
Cognitive distortions are bad mental habits. They’re patterns of thinking that tend to be negatively slanted, inaccurate, and often repetitive.
These unhelpful ways of thinking can limit one’s ability to function and excel in the world. Cognitive distortions are linked to anxiety, depression, addiction, and eating disorders. They reinforce negative thinking loops, which tend to compound and worsen over time.
Irrational thinking
Cognitive distortions are systematic patterns of thought that can lead to inaccurate or irrational conclusions. These distortions often serve as mental traps, skewing our perception of reality and affecting our emotional well-being. Let’s delve into three common types: emotional reasoning, counterfactual thinking, and catastrophizing.
Emotional Reasoning: This distortion involves using one’s emotions as a barometer for truth. For example, if you feel anxious, you might conclude that something bad is going to happen, even if there’s no objective evidence to support that belief. Emotional reasoning can create a self-perpetuating cycle: your emotions validate your distorted thoughts, which in turn intensify your emotions.
Counterfactual Thinking: This involves imagining alternative scenarios that could have occurred but didn’t. While this can be useful for problem-solving and learning, it becomes a cognitive distortion when it leads to excessive rumination and regret. For instance, thinking “If only I had done X, then Y wouldn’t have happened” can make you stuck in a loop of what-ifs, preventing you from moving forward.
Catastrophizing: This is the tendency to imagine the worst possible outcome in any given situation. It’s like always expecting a minor stumble to turn into a catastrophic fall. This distortion can lead to heightened stress and anxiety, as you’re constantly bracing for disaster.
More cognitive distortions
Cognitive distortion
Explanation
Example
all-or-nothing thinking
viewing everything in absolute and extremely polarized terms
"nothing good ever happens" or "I'm always behind"
blaming
focusing on other people as source of your negative feelings, & refusing to take responsibility for changing yourself; or conversely, blaming yourself harshly for things that were out of your control
catastrophizing
belief that disaster will strike no matter what, and that what will happen will be too awful to bear
"What if tragedy strikes?" "What if it happens to me?"
counterfactual thinking
A kind of mental bargaining or longing to live in the alternate timeline where one had made a different decision
"If only I could have done it differently..."
dichotomous thinking
viewing events or people in all-or-nothing terms
discounting positives
claiming that positive things you or others do are trivial, or ignoring good things that have happened to you
emotional reasoning
letting feelings guide interpretation of reality; a way of judging yourself or your circumstances based on your emotions
"If I feel that way, it must be true"
filtering
mentally "filters out" the positive aspects of a situation while magnifying the negative aspects
fortune-telling
predicting the future negatively
framing effects
tendency for decisions to be shaped by inconsequential features of choice problems
halo effect
belief that one's success in a domain automagically qualifies them to have skills and expertise in other areas
illusory correlation
tendency to perceive a relationship between two variables when no relation exists
reject any evidence or arguments that might contradict negative thoughts
intuitive heuristics
tendency when faced with a difficult question of answering an easier question instead, typically without noticing the substitution
just-world hypothesis
belief that good things tend to happen to good people, while bad things tend to happen to bad people
labeling
assigning global negative traits to self & others; making a judgment about yourself or someone else as a person, versus seeing the behavior as something they did that doesn't define them as an individual
ludic fallacy
in assessing the potential amount of risk in a system or decision, mistaking the real randomness of life for the well-defined risk of casinos
magical thinking
a way of imagining you can wish reality into existence through the sheer force of your mind. Part of a child developmental phase that not everyone grows out of.
http://doctorparadox.net/essays/magical-thinking/
magnification
exaggerating the importance of flaws and problems while minimizing the impact of desirable qualities and achievements
mind reading
assuming what someone is thinking w/o sufficient evidence; jumping to conclusions
negative filtering
focusing exclusively on negatives & ignoring positives
nominal realism
child development phase where names of objects aren't just symbols but intrinsic parts of the objects. Sometimes called word realism, and related to magical thinking
overgeneralizing
making a rule or predicting globally negative patterns on the basis of single incident
projection
attributing qualities to external actors or forces that one feels within and either a) wishes to promote and have echoed back to onself, or b) eradicate or squelch from oneself by believing that the quality exists elsewhere, in others, but not in oneself
provincialism
the tendency to see things only from the point of view of those in charge of our immediate in-groups
shoulds
a list of ironclad rules one lives and punishes oneself by
"I should exercise more" "I should eat better"
teleological fallacy
illusion that you know exactly where you're going, knew exactly where you were going in the past, & that others have succeeded in the past by knowing where they were going
academia especially is rife with this one
what if?
keep asking series of ?s on prospective events & being unsatisfied with any answers
The special grand jury in Georgia that investigated efforts to overturn the state’s 2020 presidential election results in favor of loser Donald Trump has recommended indictments against 39 individuals, a number significantly higher than the 19 people ultimately charged by prosecutors. Among those recommended for indictment in the Georgia RICO case but who were not charged were South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, former U.S. Senators Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue of Georgia, and former Trump national security adviser Mike Flynn.
The report suggests that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis exercised discretion in streamlining the case, possibly due to factors like immunity deals, federal protections, or insufficient evidence. The grand jury accused the individuals of various offenses, including racketeering, conspiracy to defraud the state, false statements, perjury, and criminal solicitation to commit election fraud.
39 Georgia co-conspirators recommended for indictment
Rudy Giuliani — Rudy Giuliani is an American attorney and politician, best known for serving as the Mayor of New York City from 1994 to 2001. He gained national prominence for his leadership during the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Later, he became a personal lawyer to Donald Trump and was involved in various legal challenges related to the 2020 U.S. Presidential election.
John Eastman — John Eastman is a constitutional law scholar and attorney. He gained attention for advising former President Donald Trump on legal matters, particularly concerning the 2020 election. Eastman has been criticized for promoting theories that questioned the election’s integrity.
Kenneth Chesebro — Kenneth Chesebro is a less-publicized figure, primarily known as a Harvard Law School lecturer. He specializes in legal writing and research, but has not been prominently involved in mainstream political or legal events.
Donald Trump — Businessman and television personality. His presidency was marked by a polarized political climate, economic highs and lows, and two impeachments. He remains a highly influential figure in American politics.
Cleta Mitchell — Cleta Mitchell is an American lawyer specializing in election law and campaign finance. She gained attention for representing Donald Trump in matters related to the 2020 presidential election and has been a vocal critic of its outcome.
Jenna Ellis — Jenna Ellis is an American attorney and author. She served as a legal advisor to Donald Trump during his presidency and was involved in legal challenges concerning the 2020 election. Ellis is known for her conservative viewpoints.
Mark Meadows — Mark Meadows is an American politician who served as the White House Chief of Staff under Donald Trump. Prior to that, he was a U.S. Representative from North Carolina. Meadows is a founding member of the Freedom Caucus in the House of Representatives.
David Shafer — David Shafer is a Republican politician from Georgia, serving as the Chairman of the Georgia Republican Party. He has been involved in state politics for years and was a vocal supporter of Donald Trump during the 2020 election.
Ray Smith III — Ray Smith is a Georgia-based attorney who gained attention for representing the Trump campaign in legal matters related to the 2020 election in Georgia. He specializes in civil litigation and business law. He is accused of making false claims of election fraud at legislative hearings in December 2020.
Lin Wood — Lin Wood is an American attorney known for high-profile defamation cases. He became a controversial figure for his involvement in legal challenges related to the 2020 U.S. Presidential election and his promotion of conspiracy theories.
Lindsey Graham — Lindsey Graham is a U.S. Senator from South Carolina, serving since 2003. A member of the Republican Party, Graham is known for his conservative stance on issues like national security and his close relationship with Donald Trump.
Sidney Powell — Sidney Powell is an American attorney and author. She gained national attention for her involvement in legal challenges related to the 2020 presidential election, promoting theories that have been widely discredited.
Robert Cheeley — Robert Cheeley is a Georgia-based attorney specializing in personal injury law. He gained attention for his association with Lin Wood in various legal matters but is not a mainstream political figure. He is accused of making false claims of election fraud at legislative hearings in December 2020.
Mike Flynn — Michael Flynn is a retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General who briefly served as National Security Advisor under Donald Trump. He was convicted of lying to the FBI but was later pardoned by Trump.
William Ligon — William Ligon is a Republican politician who serves as a State Senator in Georgia. He gained attention for his efforts to challenge the results of the 2020 presidential election in Georgia.
David Perdue — David Perdue is an American businessman and politician who served as a U.S. Senator from Georgia from 2015 to 2021. A member of the Republican Party, Perdue was a close ally of former President Donald Trump. He lost his re-election bid in the 2021 Georgia runoff to Democrat Jon Ossoff.
Kelly Loeffler — Kelly Loeffler is an American businesswoman and politician who served as a U.S. Senator from Georgia. Appointed in 2019, she lost her seat to Democrat Raphael Warnock in the 2021 Georgia runoff. Loeffler is co-owner of the Atlanta Dream, a WNBA team.
Cathy Latham — A previously lesser known figure in Georgia politics.
Misty Hampton — A previously lesser known figure in Georgia politics.
Scott Hall — A previously lesser known figure in Georgia politics.
Boris Epshteyn — Boris Epshteyn is a Russian-American political strategist and commentator. He served as a special assistant to President Donald Trump and has been a vocal supporter of Trump’s policies.
Jeffrey Clark — Jeff Clark is an American attorney who served as the Assistant Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division under the Trump administration. He gained attention for his role in Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.
Kurt Hilbert — Kurt Hilbert is an American attorney based in Georgia. He gained attention for his involvement in legal challenges related to the 2020 U.S. Presidential election, particularly in Georgia.
Stephen Lee — A previously lesser known figure in Georgia politics.
Trevian Kutti — Trevian Kutti is a public relations consultant who has worked with high-profile clients, including politicians and celebrities. She is not a mainstream political figure but has some influence in the PR world.
Harrison Floyd — Harrison Floyd is a military veteran and political activist. He has been involved in conservative political campaigns and organizations but is not a mainstream political figure.
Alex Kaufman — Alex Kaufman is an American attorney based in Georgia. He specializes in election law and has been involved in various legal matters related to elections, although he is not a widely recognized public figure.
Joseph Brannan — A previously lesser known figure in Georgia politics.
Vikki Consiglio — Vikki Consiglio is a Georgia-based political activist and member of the Republican Party. She has been involved in local politics and grassroots organizing but is not a mainstream political figure.
Carolyn Fisher — A previously lesser known figure in Georgia politics.
Burt Jones — Burt Jones is an American businessman and politician serving as a Republican State Senator in Georgia. He has been in office since 2013 and is known for his conservative stances on issues like healthcare and education. Jones was a vocal supporter of Donald Trump and has been involved in efforts to challenge the 2020 election results in Georgia.
Gloria Godwin — A previously lesser known figure in Georgia politics.
Mark Hennessy — A previously lesser known figure in Georgia politics.
Mark Amick — A previously lesser known figure in Georgia politics.
John Downey — A previously lesser known figure in Georgia politics.
Brad Carver — Brad Carver is an American attorney and political strategist based in Georgia. He is a partner at Hall Booth Smith, P.C., and specializes in governmental affairs. Carver has been involved in Republican politics and has served as a delegate to the Republican National Convention.
Shawn Still — A previously lesser known figure in Georgia politics.
C. B. Yadav — C. B. Yadav is a businessman and community leader based in Georgia. While not a mainstream political figure, Yadav has been involved in local community initiatives and has received recognition for his philanthropic efforts.
Jacki Pick — Jacki Pick is an American attorney and conservative commentator. She has appeared on various media platforms to discuss legal and political issues. Pick is known for her conservative viewpoints and has been a guest speaker at several conservative events.
What is RICO?
The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is a U.S. federal law enacted in 1970, designed to combat organized crime. Initially aimed at dismantling the Mafia, RICO has evolved to address a broad range of illegal activities carried out by enterprises, which can include businesses, gangs, and even political organizations. The law targets patterns of racketeering, which may involve activities like money laundering, drug trafficking, and fraud.
In the legal profession, RICO cases are approached with meticulous care due to their complexity. Prosecutors must prove four key elements: the existence of an “enterprise,” a pattern of racketeering activity, a connection between the enterprise and the criminal conduct, and the defendant’s participation in the enterprise through the pattern of racketeering. Establishing a “pattern” usually requires at least two acts of racketeering activity within a 10-year period.
Defense strategies often focus on dismantling one or more of these elements. For instance, they may argue that the alleged activities do not constitute a “pattern” or that the defendant was not sufficiently involved in the enterprise. Given the severe penalties, which can include hefty fines and up to 20 years in prison per racketeering count, both sides often rely on extensive documentation, expert testimonies, and intricate legal arguments.
Trials are usually long-drawn affairs, involving multiple parties and numerous charges. The prosecution may use tools like wiretaps, surveillance, and informants to build their case, while the defense may scrutinize the validity and legality of such evidence. Due to the high stakes, RICO cases are typically handled by attorneys with specialized expertise in this area of law.
TL;DR: RICO is a powerful tool for prosecuting organized criminal activities, but its cases are complex and require a nuanced legal approach.
The Stanford Prison Experiment is a seminal study in the field of social psychology, offering profound insights into the dynamics of power, authority, and human behavior. Conducted in 1971 by psychologist Philip Zimbardo, the experiment aimed to investigate the psychological effects of perceived power and authority within a simulated prison environment. Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment set the stage for deeper explorations of the ways in which individualist doctrines of western nations tend to overweight the role of the individual (dispensational attribution) while underweighting the role in the situation and social milieu of the setting.
The Experiment Setup
Zimbardo and his team transformed the basement of Stanford University’s psychology building into a mock prison. Participants, who were college students, were randomly assigned roles as either “guards” or “prisoners.” The guards were given uniforms, sunglasses to prevent eye contact, and batons, while the prisoners were stripped of personal identity, referred to by numbers, and subjected to various forms of psychological manipulation and humiliation designed to dehumanize them in the eyes of their faux captors.
The Unfolding
The Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment was initially planned to last two weeks but had to be terminated after just six days due to the extreme and disturbing behavior exhibited by the participants. The guards became increasingly sadistic, employing psychological torture techniques, and the prisoners showed signs of extreme stress, depression, and helplessness. The environment became so toxic that some prisoners had to be released early due to emotional breakdowns.
Ethical Concerns
The study has been widely criticized for its ethical shortcomings. Zimbardo himself acted as the “prison superintendent,” and his failure to intervene has been seen as a significant ethical lapse (he shares this sentiment, and has been vocal about examining his own role in the profoundly disturbing results of his experiment). The lack of informed consent and the emotional and psychological harm caused to the participants have also been points of contention in the academic community.
Before this study, though, I think it was counterintuitive to assume that otherwise decent, law-abiding good people could be turned into snarling sadists so quickly, in the right circumstances. And the reality of that truth disturbs us and the field of social psychology to this day.
Social Psychological Learnings
Despite its ethical issues, the Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment offers invaluable insights into human behavior and social psychology:
Deindividuation: The guards’ uniforms and sunglasses served to deindividuate them, making it easier for them to engage in cruel behavior without feeling personally responsible.
Social Roles and Conformity: Both guards and prisoners conformed to their assigned roles to a disturbing extent, highlighting the power of social roles in shaping behavior.
Authority and Obedience: The experiment showed how ordinary people could commit atrocious acts when they perceive themselves to be following authoritative commands.
Situational vs. Dispositional Factors: The study emphasized the influence of situational factors over dispositional ones in determining behavior. It argued that the environment could significantly impact how individuals act, as opposed to inherent personality traits.
Ethical Considerations in Research: The study serves as a cautionary tale for ethical considerations in psychological experiments, leading to stricter guidelines and review boards for research involving human subjects.
Implications and Legacy
The Zimbardo Stanford Prison Experiment has had a lasting impact on psychology, ethics, and our understanding of human behavior. It has been cited in various contexts, from understanding the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison to corporate misconduct a la Enron, et al. While the study’s ethical lapses have led to ongoing debates, its findings remain a crucial part of social psychology curricula and continue to inform our understanding of the human psyche.
Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment serves as both a revealing exploration of the dark corners of human behavior and a cautionary tale for ethical conduct in scientific research. It provides a complex, multifaceted look into the social psychological mechanisms that can lead ordinary people to commit extraordinary acts of cruelty or submission.
Phobia indoctrination is one of the principle ways a charismatic leader will lull potential followers into his thrall, by putting them into a state of perpetual fear and anxiety. They know, either instinctively or through training (or both), that people can be induced into a prolonged state of confusion easily, and that many people in states of confusion act quite irrationally. Abusers, cult leaders, and other controllers use demagoguery and other tricks to hide in plain sight and continue to accrue power while passing themselves off as harmless or extremely patriotic.
These chaos agents use emotional manipulation and other tactics of emotional predators as a tool of control. They whip followers up into a fear frenzy frequently enough to instill a set of phobia-like instinctual reactions to chosen stimuli. In addition to stoking fears of the enemies at the gates, they also inculcate irrational fears of the consequences of questioning their authority — invoking authoritarianism. Any doubts expressed about the leadership or its doctrine are subject to terrifying negative results. Cults use this formula to wield undue influence over followers, and prevent them from questioning or leaving the group.
Phobia indoctrination is a tool of cults
As part of a larger overall program of brainwashing or mind control, cults and destructive organizations use imaginary extremes (going to hell, being possessed by demons, failing miserably at life, race war, Leftist apocalypse, etc.) to shock followers into refusing to examine any evidence whatsoever. A form of unethical hypnosis, phobia indoctrination can now be carried out on a mass scale thanks to the internet and our massive media apparatus. Be sure to be on the lookout for any cult warning signs in groups and messaging all around you.
Sociopaths and other types of emotional predators are taking ample advantage of their advantage in time and distance over the slow pace of justice. The wielding of fear as a cudgel in American politics has reached a fever pitch, with anti-Critical Race Theory hysteria, anti-vaxxers, anti-government types, anti-science, Lost Cause-revival zombie MAGA footsoldiers screeching about the “freedom!!!” they wish the government to provide them for persecuting their enemies, and other social horrors are merely the tip of the climate changing iceberg.
Phobia indoctrination tactics
Strategies of phobia indoctrination include Repetition and Conditioning, where fears are built through constant exposure; Misinformation and Propaganda, using false information to paint something as dangerous; Utilizing Existing Fears, exaggerating known fears or anxieties; and Social Pressure and Group Dynamics, leveraging social influences to convince others that irrational fears are common.
Other tactics include Authority and Expert Manipulation, where false credentials are used to lend legitimacy; Emotional Manipulation, appealing directly to emotions; Isolation and Control, where a person’s environment is manipulated; and Media Manipulation, using media to provoke fear.
We had better get familiar with the lexicon and vocabulary of the coming era, so we can fight the creeping scourge of thought control roiling the land.
Recognizing cult warning signs can be vital in identifying and understanding the risk before getting involved with a group who may not have your best interests in mind.
