this is happening because it’s a marker. In Stage 5 this begins to become much more apparent. In Stage 6 it
becomes dangerous.
A classic marker in Stage 5 that increases in Stage 6 is the demonization of those in other classes, which
typically produces one or more scapegoat classes who are commonly believed to be the source of the problems,
and if they are destroyed, imprisoned, or kept out, this will lead to better results. Minority ethnic, racial, rich,
and poor groups are often demonized. Perhaps the most classic example of this is the demonizing and
scapegoating of Jews, who were blamed and persecuted for virtually all of Germany’s problems by the
Nazis. Similarly, Chinese minorities living in non-Chinese countries have been demonized and scapegoated
during periods of economic and social stress. In the UK Catholics were demonized and scapegoated in
numerous stressful periods since the 1500s, such as the Glorious Revolution and the English Civil War. The
rich are also commonly demonized, especially those who are viewed to be making their money at the
expense of the poor. Demonizing and scapegoating are a classic symptom and problem that we must keep an
eye on.
+ The Loss of Truth in the Public Domain
Not knowing what is true because of distortions in the media and propaganda increases as people become more
polarized, emotional, and politically motivated.
In Stage 5 those who are fighting typically work with those in the media to manipulate people’s emotions to
gain support and to destroy the opposition. In other words, media folks of the left join with others of the left and
media folks of the right join with others of the right in the dirty fight. For example, a common move among 1930s
populists of the left (e.g., communists) and of the right (e.g., fascists) was to take control of the media and
establish “ministers of propaganda” to guide them. The media they produced was explicitly aimed at polarizing the
population against the groups that the governments considered “enemies of the state.” The government of the
democratically run United Kingdom created a “Ministry of Information” during World War I and World War II to
spread government propaganda, and leading newspaper publishers were elevated by the government if they did
what the government wanted them to do to win the propaganda war11 or were vilified and suffered if they didn’t
cooperate. Revolutionaries did the same distorting of the truth in all sorts of publications. During the French
Revolution, newspapers run by revolutionaries pushed anti-monarchical and anti-religious sentiment, but when
those revolutionaries attained power, they shut down dissenting newspapers during the Reign of Terror. During
times of great wealth gaps and populist thinking, stories that bring down elites are popular and lucrative, especially
those that bring down left-leaning elites in right-leaning media outlets and those that bring down right-leaning
elites in left-leaning media outlets. History shows that significant increases in these activities are a problem that is
typical of Stage 5, and that when combined with the ability to inflict other punishments, the media becomes a
powerful weapon.
It is well-recognized this is happening now—that truth in media, both traditional and social, is lower than at any
other time in our lifetimes. For example, a 2019 Gallup study12 said that only 13% of Americans surveyed have “a
great deal” of trust in the media and only 41% of those surveyed said that they have either a “fair” or “great deal”
of trust in media. That compares with 72% who trusted media in 1976. This is not just a fringe media problem; it is
a mainstream media problem and a problem for our whole society. The dramatically decreased trustworthiness has
even plagued former icons of journalistic trust such as the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times, which
have seen their trust ratings plunge. In addition to being politically motivated, sensationalistic stories have become
commercially rewarding at a time when the media business is in financial trouble. Most of the media folks I speak
with share my concerns, though they typically won’t share them openly. Still, in reflecting on the problem, Martin
Baron, executive editor of the Washington Post, said, “If you have a society where people can’t agree on the basic
facts, how do you have a functioning democracy?”13 This dynamic is impeding free speech because people are
afraid to speak up because of how they will be attacked in both traditional and social media by distortions that are
meant to bring them down.
Even very capable and powerful people are now too afraid of the media to speak up about important
matters or run for public office. Since most high-profile people are torn down, most everyone agrees that it is
dangerous to be a high-profile, vocal person who fights for truth and justice, especially if one offends people who
are inclined to use the media to fight. Though not discussed in public because of fears of media reprisals, this issue
is continuously discussed in private. For example, during a lunch I had not long ago with a general who had held a