Dakota Beacon

Jesse Watters on Fox PrimeTime publicized information on March 29. Americans' perception of reality does not align with the facts. Major policy makers accept what people perceive to be true which is far different than reality. Observe carefully the individuals and themes populating entertainment, news, and commercials and you may conclude that a large percentage of the US comprises persons of color and/or LGBTQ.

Viewing TV shows, commercials, movies, and blogs shape our beliefs. Our viewing habits fill us with questionable discernments – perceptions divorced from reality. On that basis, the public draws muddled conclusions. Politicians and bureaucrats assume these skewed perceptions qualify as fact and set policy based on this alternate reality.

Jesse Watters shared the following on his show. A new poll by YouGov (https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2022/03/15/americans-misestimate-small-subgroups-population) asked people what percentage of the United States is black. Most answered 41%. They believed almost half the U.S. population is black. In fact, the percentage of black Americans is only 12% of the population.

Considering Hispanic Americans, polling shows that we think 39% of Americans are Hispanic. Not at all. Only 17% of the population is Hispanic. (That may soon change with open borders.)

How many transgender people do Americans believe live among us? People estimated 21% of our population is transgender. In reality, the number is 1%. The same may be said of beliefs about “gay” people. People believe the “gay” population must be sizable. Americans estimated that 30% of their fellow citizens are gay. Not so. The real number is 3%.

An argument may be made that perception is reality. Maybe. However, what if public perceptions are intentionally distorted for ulterior motives? What if manipulation of public perception for purposes of justifying policy decisions might be in play? Conditioning public attitudes would not be out of the realm of possibility.

The following remarks build on Watters’ presentation. Agendas of small obscure but vocal minorities have become public policy. Such questionable public policies were developed under the illusion of broad public support when in fact most of the public remained blissfully ignorant. This happens by design using the Delphi Technique (discussed a few times in The Passing Scene in years past).

In the late 1950s the RAND Corporation developed a legitimate decision-making tool, the Delphi Technique, used to analyze input from subject-matter experts. This provided the basis for reaching an optimum decision based upon forecasted outcomes. As a forecasting technique, it predicted technological developments using repeated iterations of estimates and feedback from experts until consensus occurred. The technique was applied to such diverse activities as software development cost-estimations, decision-making at the National Cancer Institute, and forecasting of US financial markets.

Over the years, the Delphi Technique migrated from RAND’s original intent of a forecasting tool to a tool for controlling consensus. What was once used as a decision-making tool now became a tool for building consensus around a pre-determined outcome. Google “Delphi Technique” for a greater appreciation of its application.

Versions of the Delphi Technique apply in ethically questionable procedures used by state and federal governments to frame public policy. Using quiet manipulation, the technique separates supporters from detractors of a desired pre-determined outcome. Opponents of the pre-determined position, usually a few brave and knowledgeable souls with legitimate reservations, find themselves the butt of group dynamics administered by a skillful facilitator. In the 1970s and 1980s this was used to persuade land owners to accept controversial zoning ordinances. It was also used to persuade communities to accept major shifts in education policy under Goals 2000.

As currently employed, the Delphi Technique leads a target group of people to a pre-determined outcome while giving the illusion of considering public input. On a large scale, politicians can use the technique, supported by the legacy media, to create purported public support. Re-polling a target audience measures the effective of the message. Messaging may be adjusted until the target is “ripe.” The administrative state, in collusion with the media, grooms a population for complicity in a guided response. The Delphi method overemphasizes consensus equating a consensus with validity.

Now, is this starting to add up? Politicians don't want you to know the real numbers because it would tank their agendas. They want you to see victims around every corner. By re-electing them, they hold out the promise of social justice.

We have become very gullible and fall for scams at an alarming rate. The media filled our minds with fantasies and untruths shielding us from thinking for ourselves. We have been conned and our administrative state uses our weaknesses against us to their advantage.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).