John Maynard Keynes wrote about economics, saying, "We have involved ourselves in a colossal muddle, having blundered in the control of a delicate machine, the working of which we do not understand." America and much of Western civilization have drifted into a witch's brew of group insanity composed of overwhelming stress, inability to solve political problems, group denial, and impaired judgment by a public under duress.
The WOKE lackeys who try to solve problems tell us to reimagine our history. However, rethinking the Bill of Rights and the Constitution requires imaginative editors. Unfortunately, that is not the case today. Instead, we have raging emotional quasi-political groups whining about how our history of freedom and equality is a slogan of terrorism that needs to end. It is ridiculous; no problems get solved. So, how is it that such a powerful and efficient country can regress to chaos so quickly?
In my earlier book, Burnt Offerings (2010), I wrote that "America devolved in the 1960s into something alien to our original republic. We have become that which we were originally against. We have become topsy-turvy where wrong is now the right." Unendurable stress has initiated a perceptual shift that has reversed public opinion. This rare kind of shift is new and seems to accompany the development of the electronic internet and the massive upsurge in anxiety experienced by internet media users. No one thought that unendurable group stress could quickly upend a well-entrenched Judeo-Christian ethic and usher in opposing values. This shocking black swan has never happened before. What has been considered normal in the past is now considered crazy by liberal progressives. The American zeitgeist suddenly seems upside-down as it tries to glorify dementedness without facts, logic, and historical faith.
Until recently, an irrational attention shift was unthinkable. About 2008, overwhelming public stress forced a rare irrational perceptual shift to reverse public opinion (Unhinged, OPA, 2018). The turmoil created by that shift continues to this day. I believe emotional turmoil is part of a disturbing increase in mental illness and impaired judgment. Unendurable emotions have become so intense that many American citizens are now mentally ill. The result is bad judgment and an inability to solve problems.
Previously, voting meant voters chose their preference on public issues using all available information within certain boundaries. In the past problem-solving began by designating a time frame for honest communication to the voting public; then, the public voted for its choice. This past communication process was largely unbiased, with few unpleasant emotions interfering. Voting today has changed as disruptive emotions now interfere radically with rational voting. Today, instead of an average rational voter's agenda, our anxious public seems to have only anxiety-provoking choices. The result seems to be that our anxious voters have no sensible choice. Their only option is to vote for the most pleasant choice without reasonable options. A forced vote under stress by a large group can quickly produce an irrational and oppositional perceptual shift. A more detailed narrative of reversed perceptual shifts will be available when my newest manuscript, "Perceptual Shift" is published.
As a result of a reversal of public opinion voting has become a forced vote for the most pleasant outcome. Recent political elections are irrational under forced choice voting as stress and distractibility intensify. Under these conditions, confused voters seek avoidance as an escape from the increased frustrations of problem-solving. The development of forced choices when voting is part of a new phenomenon associated with mass hysteria and the evolution of electronic media. The unendurable emotions present today, using electronic media, make voting under extreme stress irrational.
In February 2021 a Time magazine article by Molly Ball described a secret Campaign that affected the 2020 election. This loosely allied group, sometimes called a Shadow Campaign, is described as "a well-funded cabal of powerful people, ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions, change rules or laws, steer media coverage, and control the flow of information (Time magazine, 2021)." This unlikely secret campaign is melded together to create a perfect emotional storm that affects the result of that election. I believe this Shadow group is what politicians and the public alike call the swamp. This Great Reset is touted as an economic recovery plan but has no public consent or real scientific evidence to back it up. In my opinion, it is a giant scam.
This Shadow group's largest and most public part is called the Great Reset or the Great Narrative. In June 2020, at the peak of the COVID pandemic, Klaus Schwab, the founder of the Great Reset, wrote that "the world must act swiftly to revamp all aspects of society (Beck, Dark Future, 2023)." Beck said, in his book, that future societies governed by the Great Reset will have no First Amendment, no free speech, no free press, and censorship on social platforms and search engines on the internet.
The Great Reset includes WOKE social theories, including critical race theory (CRT), diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). These theories were developed separately as stakeholder capitalism but are included under the Great Reset. WOKE programs represent an attempt to replace our Democratic Republic and Capitalism with an unimaginative, dishonest, rich group of international elites. An in-depth account of The Great Reset, including WOKE quasi-ideology, is portrayed in more detail in Glenn Beck's book "Dark Future."
As a loosely associated Shadow Group member, WOKE Stakeholder Capitalism is often considered a separate group. Although the term originated in the African-American community as far back as 1931, its rebirth has occurred more recently around 2010. Originally, the word meant "awake" but has developed over the years to mean being well-informed politically or culturally. Today WOKE has come to be known as stakeholder capitalism, a quasi-economic system that is trying to change our older shareholder free-enterprise system. Its advocates are civil rights workers, businessmen, educators, some unions, modern liberal progressives, politicians, and some economists. More recently it has incorporated censorship, intimidation, a lack of transparency, and an unwillingness to allow criticism of the system. A more detailed narrative is available by reading the book, WOKE, INC., by Vivek Ramaswamy.
This next Shadow group involves several groups that used to be considered separate. They are American electronic media's social platforms, search engines, civil rights groups, and governmental agencies. These groups communicate, often secretly, on climate change and WOKE values using censorship. They secretly confide in ways to implement their values by censoring, intimidating, and generally coercing groups and individuals who disagree with them. While some government agencies subscribe to this cancel culture, the lead agency seems to be the Biden and Obama democratic party. To date, this group censors conservative information on the internet by labeling and deleting it as disinformation. So far it has tried to silence many conservatives.
Another group involves high-tech computer professionals, some unions, and some educators. Many wealthy people in this group often are not even citizens of the United States. They are melded into the other groups so much that it is hard to identify them. The public becomes aware of these professionals when they censor parental input to our public school system, cancel specific groups or individuals on the internet, advocate climate change, or gain public attention when they advocate socialist governmental controls that eliminate or restrict fossil fuels.
This last group is seldom mentioned as part of our Shadow Group because it is a small group of economists that have served as consultants to politicians of both majority political parties. Their theory is called Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). These theorists and their theories seem to be related to our Shadow group by an occasional mention by some economists and the obvious trend of our government and media toward attempts to increase spending and raise taxes regardless of the problems it creates in the general population.
Generally, MMT author Stephanie Kelton (The Deficit Myth, 2021) says "The government is the monopoly issuer of a fiat currency. (that). in almost all instances federal deficits are good for the economy." She says that the government does not need to balance the budget. Instead, it advocates sustained fiscal and monetary adjustments and probable tax increases.
Several credible critiques of this theory seem to indicate that inflation is an unanswered problem for MMT. I have only mentioned MMT to create an awareness in the reader of a possible relationship between MMT and the swamp. The secret in the sauce seems to be a possible covert association between MMT and the swamp. The MMT theory and the actual happenings in The Shadow group seem to me to be anything but a coincidence.
All of these groups taken together portray a perfect political storm. Although I call it a group, it seems to lack a leader. Some say Biden is the leader but he looks more like a marionette with invisible people pulling his strings. Others say that former president Obama is actually in charge of running the country. Around the time Biden won the last national election, Obama was quoted as saying that the Biden administration would complete his plan to change America. Anonymous Authority seems to be an appropriate name for our current semi-leaderless Shadow Group, otherwise known as the Swamp.
In 1955 the book "The Sane Society" was published by Erich Fromm, PhD, and it was a runaway success. It was updated and republished many times. In that book, Fromm depicted anonymous authority as something similar to our present state of affairs. He states that anonymous authority is "invisible, alienated authority," (The Sane Society, 1955). Fromm then went on to say the following.
"The laws of anonymous authority are as invisible as the laws of the market and just as unassailable. Who can attack the invisible? Who can rebel against nobody?"
I have listed several of the characteristics of Fromm's version of anonymous authority to help make clear my current depiction of the swamp as a leaderless morass of diverse types of dishonest people seeking power.
And so it goes, the current portrayal of the perfect emotional storm melded with the swamp is serious, but what caused it? One thing is certain, there is corruption at the top, among the elite. What is not so obvious is the slow demise of free-market capitalism. Capitalism has made this country very successful by putting people in competition with each other while advocating equality and our system of checks and balances on political power. It has been remarkably successful while making profitability its goal.
Recently, however, a covert replacement by the swamp has begun which substitutes the values of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion (DEI), and Critical Race Theory (CRT) for equality and the free market. As a result, the profit motive, competition, and equality are being replaced by some businesses with DEI and CRT, without the consent of the voting public or congress. As a result, the swamp is becoming something more illegitimate, unproven, and hypocritical. We are no longer solving problems; we are just trying to survive.
The 2008 presidential election was particularly irritating to me because it involved controversial political ideas for which politicians offered no accurate, consistent, factual information. In addition, vast amounts of money, often from foreign sources, flooded the market, creating confusion and blurring. As a result, almost all of the marketing was viscerally intense, with very little factual information to back it up. The emotional eruption was unendurable for many of the voting public.
The same problem seemed to hold for the 2020 presidential election and the 2022 midterms, only more so. Political combatants resorted to name-calling, investigations without reason, and failed impeachment attempts without much factual information. Then, the Covid 19 pandemic began in 2020 as it superimposed itself on top of a highly stressed voting public, making the public highly emotional again. The internet, with its social platforms, reinforced the unpleasantness as search engines and other innovative computer systems flooded the minds of Americans with an overdose of distorted and misguided information. Mass hysteria followed, and it continues today.
In the past, newspapers, radio, and word of mouth have been the mediums of regular communication. The result was that the news was slower, muted, and less disruptive. Today, large groups in crisis have become emotionally unhinged (Unhinged, OPA, 2018) because of the quickness, uncertainty, and intensity of response. The focus on blaming the police for the crime instead of the criminals is now the norm in topsy-turvy America. In addition, the American voting system in crisis has become dysfunctional.
In my book (Burnt Offerings, 2010), I explained that people seek pleasant feelings to avoid unpleasant emotions. Unfortunately, everyone is limited in the intensity and amount of unpleasantness they can experience. Mass hysteria results from experiencing intense, unpleasant feelings for a long time. While in crisis, using the media will magnify that unpleasantness, including distractibility (Stolen Focus, 2022). If unpleasant emotions are distributed by electronic media to large groups, unpleasantness becomes more unbearable.
For the first time, a recent group experience of unendurable emotions has resulted in a special kind of attention shift that has affected the outcome of several recent elections. Unendurable emotions have interfered with the mostly rational voting system Americans have used for over 200 years. Because unendurable emotions can suppress choices, voting trends support more pleasant choices regardless of content. The answer to unpleasant individual choices involves the development of more pleasant choices. In this way, unpleasantness is overcome by a more pleasant plan that is dysfunctional. It seems that the swamp, with its dishonesty and deniability, is winning the battle of public opinion because they are secretive and well-planned.
I now want to discuss how the development of a special attention shift can result in a perceptual abnormality. The traditional focus in courtroom logic has been obsessive attention to the behavior of the suspected perpetrator. More recently, the development of perceptual abnormality has shifted the emphasis from guilt or innocence according to the law, to the behavior of the prosecuting governmental organizations. Such a shift reverses the focus of attention from the potential criminal to the prosecuting agency.
In my previous book (Burnt Offerings, 2010), a narrative depicts the O.J. Simpson trial years ago where abnormal attention shifts seemed to begin. In that discussion, I said, "We appear to be losing the past, but we are not gaining the future." In the case of the O. J. Simpson trial, a dysfunctional perceptual shift was publicly acknowledged. Instead of focusing on the bad guy, the focus was reversed to the criminal justice system. The police were racists. Does that scenario seem familiar?
My book (Burnt Offerings, 2010) states that our country has become increasingly focused on "something other than.justice." Instead of focusing on the bad behavior of O.J. Simpson, racial prejudice, as an accusation, shifted the focus in that trial from the defendant's bad conduct. By doing that, the defense attorney turned their attention to the police and law enforcement. The implicit suggestion was that the police may be harmful, instead of being the good guys: they may be "racist." As a result, Mr. Simpson was found not guilty despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. When the focus changed, the goal was no longer justice. Instead, the focus was on the supposed racism of law and order,
There are numerous clear examples of how this extraordinary attention shift works in the real world. There are so many examples that shifted attention has become institutionalized as public opinion. One such instance occurred on May 15, 2021, as Hamas in the Gaza Strip launched 2900 rockets toward Israel. Hamas is a well-known terrorist group that refuses to acknowledge Israel's existence. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), a U.S. politician, condemned Israel for defending itself against the Palestinians instead of condemning Hamas for its bad behavior.
Another horrific attack occurred more recently when Hamas attacked and killed over 1200 Israelis and held several hundred Israelis hostage. The Israeli military responded with an invasion of Gaza that continues today. This time enormous protest groups throughout Western civilization called for the demise of Israel while praising Hamas and condemning Israel. This is the kind of reversed perception that has now become institutionalized as public opinion. The result is rampant public discrimination of Jews under the guise of protesting white supremacy. This kind of inverted reasoning has mushroomed into violent protests against law and order and the defunding of the police throughout our nation. All this without consequences.
This kind of cockeyed reasoning illustrates the attention-shifting happening publicly throughout Western civilization. Traditionally, Americans have rewarded good behavior for individuals and groups. In this case, the protestor's comments should be about Hamas's evil behavior, but true to form, Israel is blamed for defending itself. In this case, our Judeo-Christian ethic is topsy-turvy as the reverse is suddenly regarded as true as it regresses into chaos. To my knowledge, this sudden reversal of dearly held traditional beliefs has never happened before.
This overwhelming, irrational response is now out of control as the public generalizes public opinion to justify a dysfunctional reversed perceptual shift. Instead of factual detail, anyone who disagrees is intimidated, coerced, and called names. No disagreement is allowed as denial sets in. Name-calling such as racist or deplorable is the response instead of accurate information reinforcing the traditional point of view. This trend has resulted in defunding law enforcement while letting criminals go free. These distractions or shifts have become so socially contagious that they have become public opinion. Anybody who disagrees with a progressive liberal these days is a racist without any factual data to justify the accusation.
In my book Burnt Offerings, I said, "When public opinion becomes more powerful than the law, a radical blurring may occur." To date, that is what is happening. Shifting attention from the bad guys' behavior to the good guys' conduct is causing great harm. Distinctions between good and bad behavior are dimming. When people cannot distinguish between good and evil, justice becomes a sad game without meaning.
The boundaries between accepted cultural norms are in the process of being destroyed. We can no longer make distinctions between male and female, teacher and student, law enforcement and criminals, and normal and abnormal people. We are now all one, all without distinction. We are all part of an infinite cosmos without end. Our knowledge structure is in shambles because we now know nothing. We do not even know what a woman is.
High stress and poor judgment disrupt the normal problem-solving process. If attention shifts from the goals of the responsible group to the group process itself, then attention shifting will disrupt the accountable group. Focusing attention elsewhere to discredit a group can harm responsible groups attempting to solve significant problems. That is the problem that we have today. The citizens of America are now at an impasse in solving problems. Unendurable emotions force avoidance responses that blame the wrong person or group, making responsible problem-solving more difficult.
I hope America's current reverse focus of attention is not a manipulative attempt by antagonists to stop responsible groups from attaining essential goals. The special attention shifting in this article is called a dysfunctional perceptual shift. Intense, unpleasant emotions in groups trigger a special kind of shifting. A more detailed narrative will be available in my book "Perceptual Shift."
Such a shift is irrational and abnormal in large groups. Large dysfunctional groups force bad choices that make problem-solving impossible. As a result, we cannot solve problems as we drift into chaos. Such dysfunction is not a surprise since Americans have long been known for their practical, hands-on approach to life. They are not known as wise, creative thinkers who seek the truth. Many practical Americans are stuck and obsessed with fixing what is wrong or denying the problem altogether. They are having trouble seeing the forest for the trees. A series of almost continual abnormal perceptions have been growing at least since the O.J. Simpson trial many years ago as one problem after another is left unsolved.
Another problem for politicians or anybody who tries to solve problems is that they are still trying to solve problems the old way. Our inability to solve political issues has rested on the belief that differentiation and insight will solve our problems. Similarities have yet to be considered part of the problem-solving process. Today's problems often involve politics and politicians who use differentiation to solve problems.
For instance, the difference between an orange and a banana is its shape. An orange is round, and a banana is long and skinny. In an analyst's mind, the difference between things that exist within pre-established boundaries is the beginning of the pursuit of a solution. Detectives use clues that are different from one another (like the orange and banana) to solve crimes. For millennia, problem-solvers have analyzed crimes using only differences between things and sometimes they fail to find that solution. That failure is the result of not having enough information about the different kinds of clues. Analysts seek answers by utilizing minimal or wrong information. They mull over the same data many times expecting a new solution, and they fail over and over.
If and when a solution is found, a lightbulb lights up in the analyst's brain. When that happens, we call it insight. This remarkable insight is often attributed to the genius of the analyst. It is that moment in the analysis when the analyst recognizes the relationships between the details of the problem. In other words, the way that the different details are alike. The analyst has discovered the similarities between those differentiated details. Often analysts find solutions in their heads using similarities without explanation. Traditional problem-solving needs to explain how similarities fit into the problem-solving process as part of insight.
The saying that one cannot see the forest for the trees suggests that our obsession with differentiating between trees interferes with our understanding of the global forest. It suggests that differentiating between kinds of trees can become an obsession that fails to solve problems. I submit that when detail does not solve a problem, the perception of the entire forest provides the possibility of a new solution. Using only part of the problem-solving process makes solving problems harder. If one gets too obsessed with interpreting details, no global interpretation will be attempted.
After watching TV, reading, writing, and talking with friends, it is increasingly evident that Western civilization is on the verge of fizzling out. The most apparent symptom of a declining culture is when traditional customs and laws rapidly fail without critique. The distinction between good and evil is almost extinct as our secular society rules supreme. As a result, our inability to solve problems has never been more apparent. We can no longer distinguish between good and evil because we deny the difference. We have destroyed many of the core values that made Western civilization great.
Recent communication innovations like the internet and other creative technological ideas and gadgets can quickly intensify unpleasant emotions. Unfortunately, those same communication innovations are also making us all more distractable (Stolen Focus, 2020). Perhaps recent increases in attention deficit disorder are the result. In my opinion, an abnormal reverse perceptual shift is related to forced irrational choices made under unendurable stress.
At the same time, the internet itself encourages distractibility and magnifies the message, making sustained concentration even more difficult (Stolen Focus, 2020). It is important to note that we solve problems using only differentiation between clusters of data. To solve problems more effectively, searching for similarities should be included to complete the problem-solving process. A more detailed narrative of the complete problem-solving process can be found in my yet-to-be-published manuscript, Perceptual Shift.
Intense emotions like anxiety, depression, anger, and rage interfere with developing good judgment. Stress is the enemy of sound judgment. Stress in groups is even more difficult. Unfortunately, social internet platforms, high-tech innovation, sociopathic billionaires, and the government have decided for us. These groups have become known as the Swamp as they determine what is true or false for us. Cancel culture's scheme to eliminate essential parts of our past to reduce stress is false. Indeed, the reality is that they are trying to sell us a dead horse. To cancel parts of the past while claiming the existence of a new alternative without critique is denial.
If you believe censorship will solve our problem, consider what happened to Hitler, the king of censorship. The whole problem-solving process is necessary for wise and creative solutions. The intensity of the emotions regarding a problem must not exceed human endurance. Decision-making beyond our limits forces an avoidant response coupled with bad judgment.
Censorship is not a solution because solutions to problems are found by examining all relevant data and extrapolating appropriate theoretical solutions while following all parts of the problem-solving process. If you eliminate a part of the problem, you diminish the ability to solve problems by limiting the information available.
Once upon a time, America believed in a history that evolved and developed. Knowledge of the past was necessary because civilizations developed toward better government by studying history. History was like an onion, each layer representing a step in the right direction. Reviewing history allows past mistakes to be understood and avoided (Hanson, The End of Everything, 2024). What we have today is a dishevelment that emphasizes denial of the past. Cancel culture seeks to determine what is historically relevant for us as it destroys our history. If cancel culture were to succeed, we would no longer know the historical building blocks that we have relied on to feel safe and secure. If a problem had several conflicting parts, canceling part of it, including basic parts, would not be helpful. Reducing the amount of available information for solving problems makes solutions more difficult. Recently, when censorship arose, many citizens were unpleasantly adrift in a brain fog that disrupted problem-solving normalcy.
America has been good at solving problems precisely because we did not quickly experience long-term, unendurable emotions. Without instant flooding of emotions to large groups of people, unpleasantness was assimilated over extended periods. Currently, we use only differentiation as part of the problem-solving process. If we used differentiation conjoint with similarities to overcome unendurable stress more efficient problem-solving would occur. However, the addition of cancel culture makes solving problems, both big and small, almost impossible.
I have been saying for years that the introduction of the internet and its electronic wizardry has provided harm as well as better communication (Burnt Offerings, 2010). From 2008 on, unendurable stress interfered with a reasonable election process. Passing beyond the limits of our unpleasantness made many people unable to make rational decisions. Instead, we began to seek more pleasant emotional states or entirely avoid the current perceptual emotional distress. If we are overly stressed and forced to decide, the result could be bad judgment. In the case of a presidential election under pressure, the result could be disastrous.
Under our current conditions, group stress has interfered with political elections encumbered by a stock market crash in 2008, the COVID-19 pandemic in 2019, and the lingering trauma of the COVID-19 virus in the 2022 mid-term elections. Multiple stressors magnified by the media created bad judgment, allowing some of the worst decision-making in American history.
In the past, Democratic self-government has used technological innovation to develop a more efficient economic system with a higher standard of living. However, this time, the problems were so new and extensive that traditional innovation could not develop to manage the situation. Instead, tremendous stress and bad judgment created public opinion that is a lie. This untrue zeitgeist is just as false as the belief in the 15th century that the earth was flat.
Stress can appear anywhere, not just in politics. Politics is the focus at present. Forced choice voting under unimaginable pressure in national elections has created an unbelievable situation. Solving problems even under stress has been Western civilization's forte for several hundred years. Whenever a crisis occurred, our problem-solving ability led us to a better future.
Since communication in the past was slow and factual data scarce, individuals had time to gather information and focus on the problem without undue stress. Today, Western society's problem-solvers are in disarray because of enormous stress and distractions with little time for honest analysis. Instead of a lack of information, our minds are suddenly overwhelmed with too much information and distractions. We do not know what is true any longer.
It may surprise you when I say the American way of life is in danger. Why? Because we can no longer solve problems. In 2008, extreme fear, anxiety, depression, and anger all collided in mass hysteria concerning politics. There have been extensive panics and other unpleasant feelings in the past, but the media did not magnify unpleasant emotions enough to create unendurable stress. The unsolvable problem is that all accepted traditions, including our constitution, are now being questioned. But unfortunately, few have been willing to debate the historical underpinnings of our way of life.
Science has long known that bad judgment is a symptom of almost all mental illnesses, and mental illness is intensified when stressed. Therefore, under stressful conditions, bad judgment will likely occur and intensify. America is now in the midst of a perfect emotional storm, but most of us aren't aware of the true extent of the problem. This problem has been intensifying since 2008 with no solution in sight. It appears that there are more mentally ill people in America than usual. It is likely that the mentally ill now run things.
In 2008, Americans experienced their first emotional storm, a political firestorm encumbered by a stock market crash. Then, in 2020, the political firestorm continued as the COVID-19 pandemic was superimposed on it, creating another vast emotional firestorm during another presidential election. Finally, in the 2022 midterm elections, politicians ratcheted up the political mass hysteria encumbered by the pandemic's residual effects. Terrible judgment was often present in the final results of all three elections because of massive stress.
Last and perhaps the most crucial reason current problem-solving is not working is that the narrow racial and gender-related physical WOKE determiners are being emphasized. In his book, Vivek Ramaswamy (WOKE Inc.,2021) states that those Shadow groups "have weaponized a narrow concept of diversity to implement a monolithic social agenda increasingly intolerant of dissent."
Vivek suggests that they need to offer alternative ways to measure diversity. For example, in WOKE Inc., it is recommended that a superficial diversity that focuses on race and gender exclusively makes it possible to accuse all critics of racism because they are not black or brown. In effect, reverse discrimination is now possible. However, in current WOKEism, no criticism of the narrow version is allowed, even though a wide range of diversity definitions exist, including diversity of thought.
Any perspective that only includes the race and gender point of view cannot include other kinds of opinions for inclusion as candidates for power positions in WOKE corporate and government organizations. Under this new system, people are hired in organizations according to their ethnicity instead of the old system of hiring on ability and merit to do the job. In the meantime, all criticism is deemed racist without any objective evidence. Diversity of thought vetted with a primary emphasis on merit, ability, and experience is a more profound and fair solution to the narrow, superficial diversity of race and gender as a hiring practice for all organizations. Diversity of thought is the path to fair and equal diversity.
In an earlier section of this narrative, the abnormal evolution of a dysfunctional point-of-view was introduced. The original depiction was about the O.J. Simpson murder trial's shift of attention from the defendant to the prosecution. Originally the objective was to decide the guilt or innocence of Mr. Simpson. The shift suggested that the court system was racist.
This change of focus upended the original courtroom objective which was to determine his guilt or innocence. Instead, the new focus was whether the court was racist or not. If the court was racist, they were not capable of determining guilt or innocence. He was acquitted. Since that time many examples appeared that have shifted the focus in much the same way. The effect introduces chaos and uncertainty into Western culture's traditional Zeitgeist or public opinion. Dysfunctional perceptual shifts abound as blurring and brain fog erases boundaries between traditional things like good and bad behavior, men and women, and normal and abnormal.
Currently, it looks as if dysfunctional public opinion is advocating systematic changes throughout Western civilization. These shifts in emphasis encourage chaos, uncertainty, and extreme difficulty in solving problems. A part of this dysfunction is the current superficial, narrow, definition of diversity that supposedly determines who is racist. Since the definition of diversity traditionally has been general and the new superficial definition is specific, inequality in the form of gender or race is the only acceptable choice.
It seems that the current definition of diversity is the reverse of the traditional definition. Today's definition includes a very specific reverse discrimination that seeks unequal preferences for certain race and gender populations. It is so specific that merit or ability is not a requirement, only certain races or genders are sought. Instead of equality, inequality is the result. Instead of the old civil rights, racial discrimination against Jews, Israel, and the white race is the norm. It appears that DEI as a WOKE centerpiece has developed into an instrument of a new kind of discrimination against white elites and Jews instead of traditional civil rights equality.
Although it may not be obvious that the vetting of employees no longer includes choosing the most experienced and qualified person, it is obvious that some organizations no longer prefer the ablest. Their preference in the WOKE community is often only for certain genders or ethnicities. The results are clear, as the educational ratings of our schools have fallen lower and lower (Hegseth, Battle for the American Mind, 2022).
It has always been true that our Capitalist Economic System has rules or boundaries to enhance differences between things. The free part of free enterprise applies only to the capitalist traders as they interact competitively. Each trader's boundaries emphasize the differences between these interactions. These boundaries are in the process of being destroyed by the swamp as they erase distinctions between things. We can no longer make distinctions between male and female, teacher and student, law enforcement and criminals, and normal and abnormal people.
We are now all one, without structure. We are all part of an infinite cosmos without end. It provokes anxiety and uncertainty in us. Our knowledge structure is in shambles because we now know nothing. We must reestablish fair and equal rules around competitive interactions that fit the definition of free enterprise. Establishing rules or boundaries provides a structure for understanding the nature of the things perceived around us.
The true solution to our current stress-provoked crisis is the establishment of new boundaries for traders or players as they interact competitively, much like the game of basketball. The core interaction itself is allowed to range freely without restrictions. That is the free enterprise system. With boundaries established, the intensity of the stressors should be limited within each boundary while allowing an honest examination of the problem between structures. As in the basketball example, the game's rules allow problem analysis within the boundaries of a conflict-free mental zone. The game participants can, once again, attend to the game and its boundaries without interference. Once again, we know the difference between a man and a woman.
The idea of boundaries or rules has been a central part of thinking since the beginning of time but it was assumed, not articulated. Boundaries, in Rorschach and Gestalt Psychology, refer to form for the most part. Most perceived things have form. A car is perceived in the analyst's mind by a certain shape, with the details of this form determining the kinds of vehicles we see. This rudimentary form of a car allows us to think about cars with no distractions.
In our current crisis of muddled mental confusion, the lack of boundaries (form) is crucial. As Marshall McLuhan says," The medium is the message." In this case, the kind of medium is the basic boundary (form). Just as the basketball court and its details are the medium of the basketball game. It is important to clearly define the boundaries of each kind of medium and how it will be used without altering the basic message for all players in the game.
These mental boundaries of our current political problems provide much-needed structure for the game. These guidelines may include the total amount of money allocated for the game or time allowed to play the game and any other kind of structure for game playing. In addition, some of the essential boundaries may include foreign donors and donors with a conflict of interest.
Much like the boundaries or rules of a basketball game, the rules of media communication are meant to produce clarity and understanding of the game. However, today's lack of rules causes confusion and stress. In this way, unendurable stressors interfere with solving problems. If rules were introduced and clarity established, good judgment should follow and more effective problem-solving would result. So, as Western civilization descends into oblivion, we must reestablish rules or boundaries for limiting intense emotions communicated through our media.
In F.A. Hayek's book, The Road to Serfdom, the conflict between central planning and individual freedom is depicted in great detail. He explained that these two areas highlight the differences between democracy and socialism. While democracy enshrines individual freedom, socialism focuses on central planning and larger government control. Hayek says, "The more the state plans, the more difficult planning becomes for the individual." He says central planning "can leave those (individuals) affected with no choice." The point is well taken that authoritarian central planning curtails an individual's ability to choose, thereby limiting individual freedom.
Freedom of speech as part of capitalism has worked extremely well throughout my life. However, the advent of stakeholder capitalism and its cancel culture tends to cancel freedom of speech. The secret planning of the Swamp seeks to eliminate individual choice by canceling traditional ideas. This approach promises central planning that eliminates the core of Western Civilization. The public WOKE explanation of this theory is that it is an improvement on our tired radical approach to freedom and openness. In actuality, the Wokeness system is a poorly thought-out plan for total elimination of the past. Such a system is a recipe for disaster.
The important immediate problem is that the swamp is secretive and emotionally unable to handle honest critique. It is also apparent that they think of themselves as mentally superior elites. To have an honest plan, honest people must do the planning. Nothing fair and equal can be devised covertly by unhinged aristocrats who think they have cornered the market on truth. That is especially true when the elites are well-off and well-educated. Before any rules or boundaries can become a reality, a group of honest, knowledgeable, and diverse citizens must be vetted and held responsible for the consequences of implementation.
When honesty and transparency are the goals and good citizens are vetted, America will be able to deal creatively, once again, with our problems. The first rule of thumb is that any internet planning, big or small, should be time-limited, clear, and calm, with minimal unpleasantness. Basketball is a clear example of the American free enterprise system where the players interact freely as they compete within the rules. To begin to problem-solve effectively, information should be presented within certain rules or boundaries that allow fairness and equality between contestants. Then, trained referees enforce the rules during the game without altering the contest itself.
These new rules allow contestants and spectators to focus effectively without undue disruption or distraction. There are rules for the game because a lack of regulations would leave the players and spectators watching or playing under highly unpleasant and disorganized conditions. Chaos would leave them all distracted and unable to concentrate effectively. The important thing is that the special rules allow free interaction between players without giving one side or the other an advantage.
If unendurable stress triggered by dysfunctional perceptual shifts interferes with cultural problem-solving, this stress must be reduced or eliminated somehow without altering the primary message. To do that, information about these issues needs to be communicated with less intensity, with no sudden flooding of information, and without altering its content. Yet, the rules must also allow the free and equal play of speech and action to continue. The current DEI ideology does not allow for the free play of ideas that allow an understanding of the relationships between the differentiated parts of the problem. Cancel culture is the current primary culprit that eliminates the part of the problem necessary for a solution.
There are several reasons why current solutions for our political crisis will not work to aid effective problem-solving. First, a loose but large band of players called the Swamp developed a secret and dishonest plan, often described as a shadow campaign or the Great Reset. In an open society, it is necessary to have honest public input and support when solving problems. Dishonesty and secrecy undermine confidence in the developers of the project. Second, this shadow group does not accept criticism and instead proclaims a vague ideology called DEI. It stands for diversity, equity, and inclusion. Although it sounds official enough, it is the reversal of the traditional values of freedom, equality, free speech, and free enterprise.
The answer to WOKE planning is pretty simple. Create rules for managing stress that allow the internal content of any overly stressful communication to operate within established boundaries. For instance, as basketball evolved over more than the last century, it radically reduced the confusion and stress created by not having rules for playing the game. Those rules involved containment of the game without interfering with the participants of the game itself. By creating boundaries through guidelines, rules, or laws, everyone involved, player and spectator alike, understands the game better. As a result, the stress limiting the player's ability to play the game is no longer a problem. With special boundaries, basketball games became a pleasurable spectator sport with little, if any, unpleasant disruptions. The rules provided an uninterrupted focus, without confusion or distraction, for the spectators and players.
These rules were special because they left the interaction between competitors undisturbed. For example, there are extensive rules for the length and width of the playing area, the kind of floor, distinct boundary lines, as well as many in-game descriptions (i.e., distance from the basket to the free throw line) designed to enhance the quality and understanding of the game without bias for either competing team. These rules are available online at The International Basketball Federation's Website (FIBA) titled 2022 Official Basketball Rules. In this way, guidelines protect the game's fairness by using rules and definitions with which both teams agree. Yet, they do not alter the interaction between each side participating equally in the game.
This concept of special rules is the answer to our present crisis in communication. Unfortunately, this crisis involves a more complicated loose confederation called the Swamp. The swamp is one part of the people playing the game and their adversaries are conservatives and populists for the common person. Unfortunately, implementing this shadow campaign is wrong in most respects, because of censoring issues, intimidation, and coercion. Initially, full transparency involving most of the false communication will allow the public to have full access to real information about the problem. Then, they will be able to determine for themselves what is true or false. The result will be an increase in earned trust by the populace about governmental problems.
The core belief in establishing a fair basketball competition is the basic honesty of the game participants. The establishment of an honest governmental regime is the first step in a fair game, even if politics are involved. The swamp needs to be revamped and have designated leaders just as basketball must have teams. Honesty must first be established before fair and equal rules can be developed.
Likewise, in our current political climate, time limits on the amount of publicity allowed on all media would reduce the unpleasantness. These rules could establish boundaries by limiting the amount spent to purchase that information or by directly limiting the time allowed to market that information. The result would be less disruptive emotions and more problem-solving ability. Of course, any other conflicts that create high unendurable anxiety should also follow similar rules.
A practical example of a time-limited crisis solution would be to confine discussions of our current political conflicts to several weeks before the day of the elections. Mail-in voting should be eliminated or reduced to a few weeks before the election. No votes will be allowed after the official election day. All voters should show proof that they are citizens of the United States. The most straightforward rule is to place legal limits on national advertisements and discussions concerning political conflicts. Like most other organizations or individuals, social platforms and other internet functions should have their day in court. The result should be complete awareness of all aspects of the problem without the unpleasantness of overly intense emotions and impaired judgment.
Just as basketball is time-limited, important public depictions of intense conflicts must also be time-limited. The primary issues are not to be altered in any way. Developing some way to measure the intensity of unpleasant emotions generated by electronic media is advisable. Utilizing this complete problem-solving process will allow Western civilization to regain its ability to solve problems objectively. In the meantime, we wade into the muddled confusion created by hundreds of fools who adhere to unproven ideological positions. As the cartoon character, Pogo once said: " I is seen the enemy, and it are us."
In this article, I have depicted a society floundering in a dysfunctional political scam that could end America's self-government experiment; our esteemed republic. A colossal muddle involving the Swamp in tangent with our electronic media has created chaos. In the past America's mental stability was girded by a belief in the Judeo-Christian ethic, self-government, and opportunity for all. Today all of that is being attacked as the reverse is suddenly proposed as true, without much to support it. People are anxious, angry, and uncertain. They no longer know what to believe, but seeing is believing as the American way of life is being ripped to shreds.
This abnormal shift began just before the 2008 presidential election. This shift is still happening publicly before our eyes just before the 2024 election. A special dysfunctional shift of perception forces irrational choices under extreme duress. This shift interferes with effective problem-solving. It has not posed a problem in the past because the media gave us too little information. Today, overly intense emotions in tangent with the media's magnification, blurring, and flooding of information introduce the reverse; too much confusing information.
The Swamp is a slang term for several loose groups bound together under an unendurable emotional crisis. While the electronic media distributes dysfunctional and magnified messaging, the Swamp slowly destroys the structure of the old republic. These loosely allied groups adhere to WOKE theoretical approaches, including Critical Race Theory (CRT) and DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusiveness).
The WOKE Ideology does not allow criticism and emphasizes intimidation, coercion, and censorship. Inequality, lawfare, emotional flooding, and dimming of perception are rampant. Traditional law is diminished and reversed, as equality within the law is no longer the objective. No longer are there consequences for bad behavior. The new system's mission is to eliminate racism and white elitism.
In reality, it is a distraction that obscures traditional law's original goal: to determine guilt or innocence for bad behavior. In a larger sense, the new system will distract all governing bodies from focusing clearly on achieving their goals of managing the public good and seeking fair cooperation with other governing bodies for the good of all. Objectives in a group are designed to allow full concentration by group members in the problem-solving process. Distractions taken seriously interfere with the pursuit of problem-solving objectives. Full attention to new secondary objectives would interfere with the serious pursuit of the original objective. The distinction between guilt and innocence may well be compromised.
In this article, the swamp is depicted as many groups like the Great Reset group, the WOKE system, some internet platform employees, the Democrat party, Silicon Valley business types, civil rights groups, some educators, some union groups, sociopathic billionaires, and Modern Monetary Theory Economists. The outstanding characteristic seems to be secrecy and a lack of consequences for bad behavior. Authority seems anonymous as policies are implemented without public acceptance. It is difficult to tell who is making decisions. The current state of affairs mystifies our traditional leaders as they struggle with unsolved political conflicts.
Centralized planning and its effect on individual freedom are discussed in the last part of this article. The more we have central planning the less we have individual freedom (Hayek, F. A., The Road to Serfdom, 2007). This duality suggests that big government cannot exist together with American capitalism. On a larger scale, Authoritarian centralized planning is portrayed as an anathema to individual freedom. There is, however, a compromise between the two that could be designed and implemented. A governing body could create special rules that allow traders and negotiators to operate freely and fairly within laws, rules, or customs that we all agree to.
The example of American basketball is described in this article. When basketball was invented, it had no rules. It was not very popular because it was unorganized. Over the years, official rules were created to solve the problems created by no rules. These rules were agreed to by players and spectators alike. The result was a game that seemed fair to all. The players no longer fought and argued about the game and the players were left free to compete. The players and spectators were free to concentrate on the game, without distractions. All was well because those who were involved had confidence in the rules of the game and those who enforced those rules.
The players all understood how they played the game within the rules without changing the basics of the game. With fair rules that did not alter the basics, it was not possible to argue that one side or the other was racist or detestable. Dysfunctional shifts of attention were eliminated by rules that all agreed upon. The players could focus exclusively on the game and its rules, without distractions. In this narrative, it was explained that the same would be true for our current political problems. If it is true that today's political conflicts are like a game, all sorts of structural boundaries will need to be devised.
Because our problems currently are political and communicated largely by the media, there is a lot of distortion, dishonesty, and blatant lies melded into already intense emotions. Things are chaotic and biased people are censoring traditional behavior thinking they are the cause of the problems. Before fair and equal rules can be developed, the American public must be confident of those who establish the rules. Restrictions regarding funding, time limits, and the allocation of money equally are all issues to be developed.
A section of this article explains the importance of boundaries in depicting the game's content. When unorganized data are differentiated, boundaries help clarify those differences. Boundaries help to clarify interactions between clumps of data. This clarification makes analyzing easier and more effective. But first, we must have honest unbiased people establishing the rules so that the public will have confidence in the system.
Towards the end of this article, there is also a narrative that identifies a blind spot in our problem-solving ability. It is explained that the traditional method of solving problems only involves two steps, perceptual differentiation and insight. Perceptual similarities between data have not been articulated as part of solving problems. The example of the forest and the trees are used to explain how over-emphasis on differentiation (in this case the trees) can interfere with problem solutions by not focusing on similarities that lead to a global understanding of the whole concept (in this example, the entire forest). Without the overall concept, one might get caught obsessively analyzing details without an understanding of the complete problem. Both a lack of boundaries and our traditional blind spot can make solving problems more difficult.
In the Cancel Culture, Bad Judgment, and Twisted WOKE sections of this article, there are narratives regarding how abnormal perceptions develop, It even includes how normal perceptions utilize a two-step problem-solving process that does not include similarities. The result is a normal process that is not as effective as it could be. It has a blind spot.
In the cancel culture narrative, much of the internet confusion is the result of developing too fast without special rules or controls. As a result, censorship, dishonesty, intimidation, and coercion have developed. Bad judgment is the result of severe stress created by internet flooding and the magnification of information. The Twisted WOKE section emphasizes the result of intentional distractions that interfere with the pursuit of honorable goals. From the O.J. Simpson trial to the present, distractions likely have been used on the internet as weapons to change public perceptions by shifting attention.
Our current political crisis is rife with deception, with two competing groups calling each other liars. One group adheres to a faux ideology similar to centralized planning and socialism. the other group is traditional and advocates self-government, equality, free enterprise, and individual freedom. Confidence in all government by the general public is very low because many cannot tell who is telling the truth. They sense that maybe they are all lying. The dishonest issues are coming to a head as some factual data has finally been released and things seem to be moving in a new direction.
Both sides claim they are not to blame for the current stalemate. The Swamp advocates WOKE central planning and traditionalists advocate individual freedom. But Central planning and personal freedom do not mix (Hayek, F. A., The Road to Serfdom). There appears to be extensive denial as both groups claim the truth. The American public seems so upset that they cannot understand which side is best for the country. Confidence in our political system is at a new low. To resolve the low confidence, a new set of guidelines or rules needs to be devised by honest trustable people whose concern is the welfare of the citizens of the United States.
It seems that the American public must determine who is lying before any solution to our political problems can begin to be solved. But things are not always as they seem. Up to this point, I have described boundaries for basketball that clarify playing the game without altering the competitive match. These boundaries help explain differences between conflicting parts of the game. Although our current political games are complicated, adding boundaries will make the game fairer and more equal. By adding structure to a chaotic mess, special rules will make identifying those who are not telling the truth unnecessary. By developing special rules, those who are honest will become known and the dishonest will lose power.
Our current problem constitutes an enormous out-of-control polarized emotional eruption that needs an intervention. The public has slowly become aware of much of this problem. The anonymousness of the swamp reinforces denial. Despite it all, it has become clear to me that most of the dishonesty comes from the Swamp. But that group's anonymity and looseness make it hard to understand. It is a monumental job breaking down denial because the intentional lying was melded with delusional lying, they believe their lies. Such a situation leaves everyone involved frozen emotionally, unable to solve problems.
The gist of this article has been to articulate our current crisis accurately. This last part consists of speculation about what this all means; it is intended to fill in where questions have been generated. The most glaring question is who is making the decisions for the swamp? Some think the Obamas are covertly making decisions. Others think that the Biden family is in charge. In addition, the White House staff has been thought to be the decision-makers.
It is my opinion that the huge amounts of money donated by Swamp members who are a part of corporate America are visible proof of special interest power implemented through the government. In national elections, the debt owed to special interests by the winning political organizations is paid off in political partisan preferences. Special interest issues are bought and paid for by the winners of presidential elections. In our current crisis, the Swamp members are being paid back by the Biden administration as Obama manages that debt as part of covert leadership.
Another question is how can the American public identify who is lying in a presidential election. As a psychologist who worked with drug addicts and alcoholics as well as prison inmates, I have interacted with some of the most accomplished liars. It is my opinion that many of them can be identified when their false system is surrounded by denial, intimidation, altered facts, censorship, and coercion. The altered facts can be dealt with by stating real factual data.
If a new day is just around the corner and new more honest politics are ushered in, then honest guidelines by honest people will provide fair and honest rules for politicians and the public alike. These rules however will still allow politicians and their ideas to have the freedom to compete fairly in a free enterprise system. It seems to me that the elections this fall are the best way to start to earn confidence in American politics again.
Floyd Sours is a retired clinical Psychologist who has published two books and several articles. In addition, he has a manuscript titled "Perceptual Shift" that will be published soon. That book explains in detail what a dysfunctional Perceptual Shift is all about. My last book, "Burnt Offerings," is for sale on Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Its website is www.burntofferingsbook.com.