How do harmful ideas and moments of collective madness swiftly transform into policies and laws? Most nations appear to lack genuine popular support for these shifts, and surely, the West is managed rationally, right?
Typically, there’s a multi-step trajectory leading to these societal episodes of insanity.
Often, these self-destructive trends initiate within elite academic circles. Scholars, seeking grants, propose that new existential threats demand immediate government action, innovative laws, and public awareness. Suddenly, the public is cautioned that our warming planet could be engulfed by rising sea levels in a decade. Alternatively, it’s posited that we’re facing a civil rights issue, as countless transgender youth remain voiceless without advocacy, legislation, or access to vital hormone treatments and surgeries. Strikingly, it takes little time for these unconventional ideas to become mainstream.
The media collaborates with academia to persuade a skeptical public to “trust the science” and “follow the experts,” often dismissing dissenters as cranks or conspiracy theorists. They may be framed as racists or transphobes who need to be silenced.
Figures from Hollywood and sports enter the fray, capitalizing on the uproar—overtly demonstrating their virtue and warning the nation that adaptation is essential.
For instance, during the pandemic, people rapidly adopted behaviors like going to secluded beaches without masks or expressing doubt about the safety of mRNA vaccines. Questioning whether certain labs were the origin of the virus became taboo. Those who dared to challenge these narratives faced legal repercussions or social ostracism.
Next, liberal foundations typically allocate funding towards “research” intended to justify the viewpoints of their chosen experts. Activist groups they support often take to the streets, rallying public sentiment, typically leading to some chaos and occasional violence. They believe that disruption often spurs the public to endorse almost anything to restore order.
This generates both new victims and their oppressors.
As today’s once outrageous ideas gain traction and become institutionalized, what used to be radical policies morph into the norm. Recently, a concept termed “gender dysphoria”—recognized by ancient cultures—has emerged, claiming it affects around one in 10,000 to 30,000 individuals.
Yet, in no time, transgender issues were incorporated into the LGBTQ+ movement and soon became part of a new social paradigm. Drag shows started appearing in venues ranging from military bases to libraries, shocking many. Reports suggest that about 30% of students at some colleges might even consider transferring due to these cultural shifts.
Suddenly, people were being reminded by administrators about “preferred pronouns,” which could range from the customary “he/him” or “she/her” to more unconventional choices like “ze/hir” or the plural “they/them.”
Groupthink proliferates, and neglecting to include pronouns could lead to accusations of being counter-revolutionary or a transphobe, or downright a supporter of a previous administration.
Liberal and socialist officials observing the landscape connect well-funded campaigns with rising grassroots movements, considering them tied to increasing public support for new causes.
The initial response of liberal officials to Trump’s immigration policies showed their shock; polls indicated that the majority of Americans were in favor of stricter border control.
However, after violent protests erupted, media outlets framed the police response as being excessive. Comparisons started being made, likening ICE to oppressive regimes, stretching far beyond the usual derogatory terms.
Many believe the narratives pushed forward—that while elected officials dealt with demonstrators, ICE agents were engaged in unjust actions against innocent protesters.
Once these delusions take root, whether regarding environmental crises, immigration, or systemic issues around identity, governments begin disregarding public opinion in favor of passing laws that once seemed extreme.
Policies once considered meritocratic, like the SAT, were dismissed as “racist” and abolished. The phrase “defund the police” rose in popularity among certain activist groups.
Politicians’ rhetoric swiftly gains traction, leading to the adoption of concepts like “critical race theory” in justifying law enforcement narratives.
Even efficient nuclear plants faced closures. Significant investments directed toward transitioning from gas-powered vehicles to electric ones have proven controversial. Embarking on expensive high-speed rail projects seemed wasteful without adequate planning.
Suddenly, institutions were pressured to establish “gender-neutral” restrooms, resulting in unconventional scenarios, such as biological males participating in women’s sports—a situation that would have warranted legal consequences not long ago.
Every now and then, a realization dawns—akin to the “Emperor Has No Clothes” moment—causing a pause in this rush toward madness.
People begin questioning why their electricity bills have surged or why certain environmental narratives appear inconsistent. Observations point out peculiarities like polar bears thriving rather than perishing. Ultimately, contradictions arise around high-profile climate discussions.
Some investigative reports have surfaced, scrutinizing the narratives surrounding traumatic events and pandemic responses, while data indicate concerning side effects related to certain vaccines.
Meanwhile, colleges have quietly reintroduced SATs as they adapt coursework to better align with incoming student knowledge.
Emerging economic analyses reveal that lockdowns led to profound educational disruptions, igniting widespread psychological challenges.
Allegations of financial improprieties among activist leaders have risen, alongside research revealing disparities in law enforcement outcomes. New data challenges long-held views about crime statistics among undocumented immigrants.
Five years ago, under a new administration, the climate politics and gender discussions seemed sweeping and radical. Now, views and policies once deemed extreme flip into accepted norms.
The dynamic around illegal immigration shifted from compassion to rising concerns about public safety. Meanwhile, there’s a growing narrative that dismantles meritocracy across various fields of work.
Yet, by 2025, it seemed as though the initial fervor behind these extreme ideas began to stall, potentially fading into the annals of collective folly.
