What is the driving force behind the belief in a political philosophy, a political party, or a politician that causes a citizen to support it no matter what the counter point to that belief may be? What is the rationale for ignoring facts that are readily available, so the words and views of the opposition need not be the source of disagreement? Why would a person of reasonable intelligence refuse to change their choice of a candidate even after that candidate’s policies have failed to come to fruition as promised?

The stories of the masses being led to the ends of the earth, engaging in rituals harmful to themselves and others, even to the point of death by the cult-like rhetoric of a charismatic leader, is not uncommon. Most notable in our memories are Jim Jones and the Peoples Temple, or Marshall Applewhite with Heaven’s Gate. In both cases the end result was tragic for those involved as well as their families and also left a scar on the psyche of America and the world in the process. For those who observe the aftermath of cult followings and the details leading up to the calamity become known, we ask how can anyone be so blinded, so gullible , so foolish to believe the leaders’ nonsensical claim that eternal bliss will be the reward by engaging in the act of self-sacrifice? Are the followers innocent and unsuspecting, been brainwashed, or are they naive to the evils of man, lacking joy in life, thereby easily manipulated by the slightest glimmer of hope offered by an evil and demented guru?

During a campaign, a politician should deliver a message to the electorate, designed to inform, inspire and elicit a vote from the elector. That method has evolved from a basic one on one conversation or posting a handbill in a shop window, to the seemingly never ending television/radio commercials and computer generated robotic phone calls. While the technique of delivering the message has advanced and most certainly will continue, the content of that message should not become a weapon of that progress, in the sense that it deceives those who hear it. It is expected for a politician to present himself in the best light possible while portraying the opponent as the antitheses to all things good for the citizenry. But as of late, the normal tact for a campaigner is to malign the opposition and do little if any, to accentuate his own proposals.

With this “new” way to campaign, the electorate has been effectively brainwashed to rely on the polished catchphrase to describe the issue(s) of their concern without regard to the details of said mantra. Why have we traded our freedoms and ability to self-govern for a bumper sticker slogan, or a witticism with the refrain of a favored food item? In an election cycle, as our passions began to peak, so does the rhetoric from the office seeker. If the person we favor should win, our euphoria continues for a time, and the representative takes advantage of the jubilation by dispensing “cake” from the spoils of that victory. But the crumbs, while sweet at the onset, begin to sour as the administration matures. The power driven office-bearer, aware of the impending unrest, must now quell the turbulence created by his veiled promises.

When words no longer are sufficient to steady the ship the unethical leader will resort to gimmicks in order to preserve allegiance from the flock. The most effective tact thus far is to focus on the fears of the constituents; “you will lose certain benefits, even your own identity, if my political adversaries are permitted to impede the goals of my administration.” So the order goes out to defend your existence, by denying the enemy any advantage or opportunity to take away what is your entitled reward. It is the same maneuver used by the kingpin of the cult to entice, excite and retain, then cajole the devotees into a lifestyle which rewards them with dismay and despair.

Over four decades, parity and prosperity has been the promise to minorities by the Democrat party. However each election cycle, whether local or national the vow, the pledge, the guarantee to deliver on that promise is made yet again. Why have the party loyalists not questioned the capacity of the party to deliver on the promises? When will the disciples of hope decide to change? Only after the true believers remove the rose- colored 3-D glasses will the truth be seen, and genuine autonomous freedom experienced.