Exposing How Our Political Parties & Mainstream Media Use Framing to Purposefully Mislead Us

America is more divided than ever since the Civil War

We all know, especially here on Medium, that outside of the Civil War, America has never been more divided politically than we are now. The presidency of Donald Trump deepened that divide with his rhetoric.

That rhetoric was toxic and ignorant or entertaining and straightforward, depending on which side of the divide you fall on. Unlike most people, his personality is not one that allows someone the comfort of maintaining a neutral attitude towards him.

Many of us are deeply concerned that the American political system will remain forever fractured. At this time, it looks as though the American people will be split between two realities, two wildly different perspectives on basic fundamental truths.

I’m more hopeful. I’m relying on the fickleness and short memory of the average American voter to lessen his influence over the hearts and minds of the 70 million people who voted for him. I’m hopeful that life will move along without the media needing to give us his opinion on a daily basis and that he will fade into history and irrelevancy. That’s largely dependent on what happens over the next four years.

Human biology, negative campaigning, and Vladimir Putin

While we have the opportunity, I would like to examine the forces that enabled the Trump phenomenon in the first place. In competitions, like elections, you have two options; either you can run on your record, pointing out the positive aspects which make you the best candidate or you can take the easier and more effective route — undermine the character of your opponent.

It is basic human biology that elevates negative input over positive input. We are geared towards survival and negative news is weighted as more important to our survival than positive news. As often as we complain that we don’t like negative campaigning, historically, “going negative” has been very successful in getting your candidate elected.

Hillary Clinton may have been an experienced, well-respected stateswoman, knowledgeable of the inner workings of government, but she eats babies. The idea of “eating babies” strikes us right in the survival instinct. Although false, as a short statement it is much more memorable than her 30-year record as an effective bureaucrat and diplomat.

Our media is motivated by profits and capitalizes on stories that will get the most attention, especially those which provide shock value. Asking them to ignore the tropes created by the Russian propaganda machine is like asking the serial rapist you’ve hired to watch your house to ignore the group of cheerleaders you have tied up in the basement. Russia is successfully subverting American unity and our national interests by exploiting these flaws in our system.

Vladimir Putin is someone who understands frames. He understands the American public better than most Americans. A good example to help us understand how perspectives are framed is the issue which most divides Republicans and Democrats. That is the issue of abortion.

The anti-abortion movement reframes itself as pro-life

Before 1980, the “pro-life” position was more commonly known as anti-abortion. The term pro-life pre-1980 applied to a position taken on all life. A pro-lifer would be for helping the poor, in favor of expanding women’s rights and the rights of racial minorities as well as against abortion and the death penalty. In today’s political climate, after being manipulated and divided along political lines, it is difficult to find someone who is both against the death penalty and anti-abortion — the more literal and traditional meaning of “pro-life.”

Consider the way the issue of abortion is presented to us, in other words how it is framed, it should be easy for us to see how the frame has been set askew, turned crooked and sideways. Trump himself used to be a pro-choice Democrat. He would never have won the Republican nomination if he didn’t publicly change his supposed position.

A pro-choice Republican or a pro-life Democrat could probably win the presidency in a national election but would never be able to win the nomination of their party in the first place. The way the issue is framed ensures that the American population will forever be morally divided into two diametrically opposing points-of-view.

If you take a step back from the emotionality of the issue, it looks very much like this singular issue has been used to purposefully subvert the power of the American voter ensuring perpetual rule by the rich and powerful.

Our political power has been stolen from us

Americans need to understand this: our vote, our voice and our political power has been taken away from us through an unspoken agreement between the Republican and Democratic parties. The two parties have deposed our constitutional system, the Constitution of the United States, in order to solidify their hold on political power into eternity.

As long as we as a voting population agree to the frame, we agree to the suppression of the constitution in favor of the Republican/Democratic alliance against the American people. The solution to this conundrum can never be through either party since both are guilty of this criminality.

After watching the Democratic party snatch defeat from the jaws of victory for 40 years, it has become obvious that they are complicit in the suppression of better ideas to support the Republican/Democratic power-sharing alliance.

Just as I don’t believe that your average Republican would support fascism under normal circumstances, I don’t believe that the average Democrat could possibly be so stupid as to not promote better policies which have been shown to be successful in American localities and internationally than the dull and unimaginative policies they support.

Mainstream media is complicit in undermining our government and our educational system

Mainstream media’s main motivation outside of making money and ever-increasing profits is to promote and maintain the status quo. That means giving airtime and legitimacy to both these parties while ignoring all other viable alternatives. As long as they are making money, the current system works in their favor.

This is why they passively support the current politics of hate and ignorance which has infested the American political system. This is why no one with any political power wants an educated voting population. They purposefully deprive Americans of real education to prop up this system.

This is why they passively support the general population of Republicans and Democrats at large demonizing each other. A divided populous are easier to control. It is easier to deny us basic healthcare, livable wages and a robust, booming economy that would benefit those of all political persuasions.

“A house divided against itself cannot stand.” — Abraham Lincoln, 1858.

“”Let us trust God, and our better judgment to set us right hereafter. United we stand, divided we fall. Let us not split into factions which must destroy that union upon which our existence hangs.” — Patrick Henry, 1799.

Experiments in communication

In order for us to overcome this attack against the Constitution and the American population, we must change our frames. In an experiment conducted by Matthew Feinberg and Robb Willer, they were able to bridge the gap of understanding between what is sold to us as diametrically opposed viewpoints by changing the framing away from our typical arguments.

In one of their experiments, which dealt with the topic of same-sex marriage, politically liberal participants were more persuaded when the argument was reframed to focus on fairness (treating everyone equally), while conservative-leaning participants found the argument more compelling when it was framed to emphasize how same-sex couples were loyal, patriotic Americans.

SOS America

As Americans, we need to set aside our egos and the emotions we connect with our strongly held beliefs so that we may reframe divisive issues away from the two positions which are spoon-fed to us by our political parties.

There are more than these two perspectives from which we can tackle complicated issues. In fact, I would argue that the two alternatives which are presented to us on every issue are likely the two worst of all possible choices, much like the candidates chosen by those with power, wealth and influence for us little people to vote for.

The road we are on now, supporting misinterpretation and ignorance of the opposition’s viewpoints, violent rhetoric and increasing factionalization of the voting population puts us firmly on the same road which led to the collapse of the Roman Empire. The survival of the United States depends on us acknowledging this elephant in the room and taking steps away from allowing ourselves to be continually factionalized and to move towards a deeper understanding and reunification.