masterwordsmith-unplugged

Many have expressed how it is difficult to gauge the political scenario. The main variables are constantly changing and the most destabilizing truth is that in politics, there are no permanent friends or foes; only permanent interests.

Having stayed away from the fray for months now, I have been analyzing the sequence of events from pre-2008 days till now.  After enjoying solitude for the past two months, I can see more clearly now and surmise that it is possible that Malaysians have been led by our noses, possibly due to an insidious agenda set by X with the aid of Y so that we can arrive at Z.

Unbeknownst to us, I hypothesize that social engineers, as instructed by X, in disguise as opinion leaders and/or writers have been twiddling with public opinion so as to overtly and covertly influence activism and the face of politics, paving the way for the rise of some followed by their downfall. And many have been had for few saw through the smokescreen.

This can be analyzed via a few models/theories

A. Theory of Persuasion

B. Grunig's Situational Theory (particular focus on activism)

C. Yale Development Model (CLICK HERE for detailed explanation)

D. Situational Theory of Publics -Tailoring the message

E. Heider's Attribution Theory


Heider's attribution theory is a motivational theory that looks at how the average person constructs the meaning of an event based on his /her motives to find a cause and his/her knowledge of the environment.

Basically, this theory looks at how people make sense of their world; what cause and effect inferences they make about the behaviors of others and of themselves. Heider states that there is a strong need in individuals to understand transient events by attributing them to the actor's disposition or to stable characteristics of the environment.

The purpose behind making attributions is to achieve COGNITIVE CONTROL over one's environment by explaining and understanding the causes behind behaviors and environmental occurrences.

F. Media - Using the media to disseminate information, frame messages and shape perceptions, even in agenda setting strategies. The one who dominates the news is more likely to maintain status quo. Minority voices are then excluded.

If you scan the news, you can see many instances where there appears to be a strange and dysfunctional pattern where politicians seem to think they play outside or above the rules. And it's a game that the press love to join. A good example would be unsupported allegations after which there is the usual talk of a lawsuit and the whole works.

When such news explodes, many are all too ready to join the fray just so they can claim another scalp. Is this how the unelected have power over the elected? Records show that the greater your fame, the more likely you would be cut down and cast out. Following that would be increasing howls for resignation and with much determination, the high and mighty might soon be bulldozed. Some come back though and have the audacity to claim that they were brave to admit their wrong and resigned.

Whatever it is, both sides of the divide must be fair to each other and themselves. If one side expects honesty and transparency from the other, when the latter requests the same, the other side should comply in a spirit of honesty.

With all the different shades of news bombarding us from all fronts, the electorate cannot know the minds of their elected leaders. Their perception may not be accurate because obviously, that had been shaped by unknown forces. If they like what they see or read, the tendency if to assume he is kind and caring and worth their votes. And sadly, that is the way it goes in many instances - paving the way to arrogant/ineffective/absent or worse still, obnoxious leaders.

It is so easy for us to form wrong opinions if we depend on online portals or MSM for news/opinions etc. Personally, I believe each of us MUST really critically assess the situation/news and do our own research and not be led by the noses to always believe what we are told.

Otherwise, we have no one to blame but ourselves if we do otherwise and/or think in black and white terms. Still, I hypothesize that we have been fooled - hook, line and sinker. Only time will tell whether we have been led round the mulberry bush!