The Progressive Era and Anti-War

 

    People often hear, but never consider the repercussions of the saying, "all politicians are selfish". It's a rather simple yet important four word phrase that ultimately shapes both our nation, and our world as a whole. We often can look at previous and current actions of our Presidents and our Congressmen and we are made aware of their faulty actions, but we often choose to blame it on Political Party and cast it away instead of removing our blind faith in leaders consumed by greed. The calculated nature of the Government allows for the limited critique on their actions in a public nature. The Government dominates the world of Mainstream Media by manipulating the content to provide a calculated agenda, casting aside other content that goes against that agenda, and banning content that can misconstrued the agenda. Because of this domination of the media, people often blindly follow their parties' political leaders in hopes of the often false narratives they are promoting; whether that be human rights, economic changes, or immigration reforms. These narratives are spun in a way that will make the party elect seem more appealing and the opposite elect appear less appealing, creating an even bigger divide in the Nation than ever before. 

    Looking at Mainstream Media, we can often see the agenda the Government is promoting, and the content it is minimizing. As we all are aware, the Government cannot actively make laws abridging our rights to speak, especially on matters regarding the decisions made by the Government; however, they often will find loopholes and urge major media services to delete, ban, or hide content that goes against their specific agenda. This is where the age old battle of war versus anti-war comes into play. There are countless reasons why a Government would be Pro-War regardless of the feelings of its people. One of these reasons is, as discussed previously, the greedy tendency to take. If it benefits the country on an economic level, Governments (worldwide) will take advantage of invading third world countries in order to capitalize on a new form of income (often oil, gold etc.). Another reason for Governments promoting war is a sense of pride. Every Government in the world wants to prove that they are the "Big Dog" by expanding and invading through military enforcement and aggression. Which then plays into the roles of alliances and enemies. When a country's ally or enemy enters a war, they are then more likely to contribute to that war in order to either protect their ally, or destroy their enemy. 

    Regardless of the reason a Government chooses war, it comes at a cost of capital and life, which is often why the average individual is anti-war. The Government does not want an uproar as a result of people critiquing their actions. In fact, the last thing they want is for people to openly and publicly call out the selfish nature of the Government going to war. So to actively suppress this idea that we are fighting in a war we did not need to be a part of, the Government uses its power to shift mainstream media in another direction. Anti-War labels and ideas get suppressed or thrown out in order to maintain a less loud emphasis on the problems with war. The Government is aware that the majority of individuals are anti-war, but again with the clear personal gains from war, they often do not care. Anti-War sites are not publicized through Mainstream Media, talks of Anti-War movements and rallies are often banned and suppressed, and the Government will continue to promote war in order to gain land, capital and power. It is a never ending cycle that starts with the small, but successful shift in attention. How can we focus on violence we contribute to other nations, when the Government shifts our perspective to our violence against each other?