Views: 50

Freedom, democracy and truth.

Frans Vandenbosch 方腾波  10.12.2025

For the fainthearted:

In this article, I will invite you to some self-reflection. I will challenge you with some uncomfortable observations about common patterns in our society. For those who prefer not to engage with such material, you may wish to stop reading here. For those who decide this isn’t for them halfway through: you’re welcome to unsubscribe from my newsletters at any time. For those courageous enough to continue… read on. If you feel stressed already, scroll down to “Finally, to soften the mood, a bit of music.”

Your life is a lie.

Your existence unfolds within a carefully constructed illusion of autonomy.

On the surface, everything appears perfectly functional. Your daily routine runs smoothly: bills get paid, problems get solved, responsibilities get managed. You’ve mastered the mechanics of modern life, developed systems for handling whatever challenges arise. There’s a comforting sense of control, a reassuring predictability to it all.

But beneath this veneer of competence lies a troubling reality: you are not the architect of this life you’re living.

The choices you believe you’re making freely (where to work, what to buy, how to spend your time, even what to think) have been subtly shaped by forces you’ve never fully examined. Algorithms curate the information you see. Marketing professionals craft the desires you feel. Economic systems determine which options are even available to you. Social pressures define what seems possible or acceptable. You move through life like a passenger who’s been convinced they’re driving, hands on a wheel that’s connected to nothing.

You speak confidently about living in a free, democratic society. These words roll off your tongue with the ease of unexamined certainty. But have you ever truly interrogated what freedom means in your context? Have you quantified it, measured it against any objective standard? Have you conducted a rigorous analysis comparing the actual liberties you possess with those enjoyed by people in other nations, other systems, other times? Or have you simply accepted the narrative you’ve been given: that you are free because you’ve been told you are free?

The truth is more unsettling: you are being lived rather than living. Your life has become something that happens to you, a script written by invisible hands, a path laid out by interests that are not your own. What you mistake for autonomy is often just the freedom to choose between pre-approved options, to select from a menu you never wrote.

This is the fundamental deception: the belief that the life you’re experiencing is genuinely yours, when in reality, it belongs to systems, structures, and powers that benefit from your never asking these questions at all.

Your life is a lie.

On the tones of Stumbling in   by Suzie Quatro and Chris Norman  Nov .1978
https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV12W411972F/

Your life is a lie

.. whatever you do

The most perfect slavery: On the tyranny of perceived freedom

“Niemand ist mehr Sklave, als der sich für frei hält, ohne es zu sein.“, Die Wahlverwandtschaften (Elective Affinities), Part II, Chapter 5
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749-1832) wrote this in 1809 during a time of significant social and philosophical change in Europe. Goethe was reflecting on a recurring Enlightenment and Romantic era concern about true freedom and self-deception. The quote criticizes the idea that formal, external freedom guarantees true liberty. It suggests that the most profound form of enslavement is an internal one, being trapped by illusions or unexamined beliefs while believing yourself to be free.

“Das Ich setzt ursprünglich schlechthin sein eignes Seyn.” (The I originally and absolutely posits its own being.)
Johann Gottlieb Fichte  (1762-1814)
True freedom for Johann Gottlieb Fichte is an active, ethical striving against limitations. A passive acceptance of one’s state without this striving could be seen as a form of unfreedom, akin to Goethe’s “slavery.”

“Herrschaft und Knechtschaft” in “Selbstständigkeit und Unselbstständigkeit des Selbstbewußtseins”
(“Lordship and Bondage” in “Independence and dependence of self-awareness”)
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831)
Hegel argued that recognition by another conscious being is crucial for self-awareness. A person isolated in their own subjective certainty (believing they are free without external challenge or recognition) is in a limited state.


“L’homme est né libre, et partout il est dans les fers.” (Man is born free, and everywhere he is in shackles) 
Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778)
Rousseau’s famous opening to The Social Contract sets the stage for the entire Enlightenment debate. Society and disloyal leadership impose chains, but some chains are internalized and mistaken for freedom.


“Ästhetische Erziehung” (Aesthetic Education)
Friedrich Schiller (1759-1805)  
Schiller believed that true political freedom must be preceded by inner freedom, cultivated through beauty and art. Without this inner development, a person is not truly free.

The daily gaslighting by our regular media

Gaslighting by our western mainstream media functions as the modern mechanism for creating “the most perfect slavery.” It crafts a simulated reality where choices feel genuine but are confined to frameworks designed by unseen interests, mirroring Goethe’s slave who “believes himself free without being so.” By relentlessly distorting perceptions and branding compliance as informed consent, it severs the public from the authentic recognition and striving that Fichte and Hegel deemed essential for true freedom. Thus, the citizen, convinced of their liberty within a manufactured spectrum of debate, becomes an unwitting participant in their own subjugation. This represents the evolved, systemic form of the internal shackles that Rousseau and Schiller warned must be broken for genuine autonomy to arise.

A catatonic incapacity to conceive the future.

To the extent it can be delineated at all, the present mentality of the western ruling class towards China is a peculiar compound of irrational fear, entrenched hatred, and sheer incredulity, centred on an almost catatonic incapacity to conceive the future. [1]
This last element is paramount. Nothing within their professional experience or indeed their formative education has prepared them for a reality in which they are demonstrably economically inferior to another global power, and where no conceivable action can alter this fact. [2]

Colonisation of the mind: the means, roots and global perils

Chinese Xinhua scholars have recently published an excellent white paper on the colonization of the mind by the US. It is a quite extensive 36 pages report titled “Colonisation of the mind: the means, roots and global perils of US cognitive warfare.” [3]  The S.L. Kanthan summary is here. [4]

It presents a critical analysis of United States foreign policy as a sustained project of ideological influence. The core thesis argues that, particularly after the cold war, the US has leveraged its global supremacy to export its values and ideology worldwide. This process is termed ‘mind colonisation’, with the objective of reshaping national conceptions, creating philosophical dependence on an American centric worldview, and securing global compliance to serve US interests at a lower cost than traditional military or political domination.

The report traces the historical roots of this practice to the post war period, where the promotion of American concepts such as ‘the four freedoms’ laid the groundwork. It contends that the US, as a primary architect of the international order, has systematically glorified its own political and economic systems while deliberately deconstructing non-American ideologies and indigenous cultures. This dual strategy of construction and deconstruction is said to have achieved more profound effects than historical colonial empires. The theoretical underpinnings are linked to American strategists such as Joseph Nye and Zbigniew Brzezinski, who articulated the importance of controlling the political environment and reinforcing cultural exemplars for maintaining hegemony.

The means of this cognitive colonisation are described as multifaceted and evolving. The report identifies a triad of propaganda methods: overt ‘white’ propaganda through official channels like the Voice of America; covert ‘black’ propaganda conducted by intelligence agencies; and indirect ‘grey’ propaganda via non-governmental organisations to create an illusion of spontaneity. Mastery over global information systems is deemed crucial. This includes control of legacy media conglomerates, internet infrastructure, and dominant social media platforms like Facebook and X, where algorithms are used to manipulate public opinion and shape perceptions. Furthermore, the US is accused of leveraging its cultural and academic hegemony through Hollywood films, video games, and programmes like the Fulbright scheme to cultivate a pro American elite globally.

A significant portion of the analysis is devoted to the evolution of this influence into a formalised strategy of ‘cognitive warfare’. It notes that early 21st century breakthroughs in psychological science, neuroscience, and artificial intelligence have been integrated into this framework, with the 2022 US National Security Strategy reportedly elevating cognitive warfare to strategic parity with physical combat. This technology driven manipulation is presented as a new, more potent tactic for mind colonisation.

The global perils are severe. The report states that this cognitive colonisation leads to ‘cultural aphasia’ in developing nations, where local identity and confidence are eroded by American culture, resulting in a loss of national subjectivity. It also asserts that this ideological manipulation paves the way for tangible geopolitical and economic gains, citing historical examples from the Spanish American war to contemporary actions against Chinese technology firms and Bolivian lithium reserves. The ultimate consequence is portrayed as the erosion of civilisational diversity and the entrenchment of a homogenised, US dominated international system that privileges American interests under the guise of universal values.

In conclusion, the report calls for a recognition of this cognitive warfare as a prerequisite for independent development. It advocates for breaking these ideological shackles through bolstered cultural confidence and promoting genuine inter civilisational exchange and mutual learning, rather than unilateral imposition.

The Theory of Stupidity

I will first shortly explain and quote Dietrich Bonhoeffer in German, his own language, because it is so much clearer:

Dietrich Bonhoeffers Theorie der Dummheit zeigt, dass Menschen ohne Urteilsvermögen, ohne Logik und ohne die Fähigkeit zur Selbstreflexion gefährlicher sein können als solche, die mit dem Bösen ausgestattet sind. [5]

Gegen die Dummheit sind wir wehrlos. Weder mit Protesten noch durch Gewalt läßt sich hier etwas ausrichten; Gründe verfangen nicht; Tatsachen, die dem eigenen Vorurteil widersprechen, brauchen einfach nicht geglaubt zu werden. In solchen Fällen wird der Dumme sogar kritisch und wenn sie unausweichlich sind, können sie einfach als nichtssagende Einzelfälle beiseitegeschoben werden. Dabei ist der Dumme im Unterschied zum Bösen restlos mit sich selbst zufrieden; ja, er wird sogar gefährlich, indem er leicht gereizt zum Angriff übergeht. Daher ist dem Dummen gegenüber mehr Vorsicht geboten als gegenüber dem Bösen. Niemals werden wir mehr versuchen, den Dummen durch Gründe zu überzeugen; es ist sinnlos und gefährlich.

We are defenceless against stupidity. Neither protests nor violence can achieve anything here; reasons don’t work; facts that contradict one’s own prejudices simply needn’t be believed. In such cases, the stupid person even becomes critical and when they are unavoidable, they can simply be dismissed as meaningless isolated incidents. Yet, unlike the evil person, the stupid person is completely content with himself; indeed, he even becomes dangerous by attacking when easily irritated. Therefore, more caution is required with the stupid person than with the evil person. We will never again try to convince the stupid person with reasons; it is pointless and dangerous.


The core idea of Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s theory is that stupidity is a far greater danger to society than evil.

Bonhoeffer, a German theologian and anti-Nazi dissident, developed this idea while imprisoned by the Gestapo during World War II. He observed that the power of certain regimes was sustained not merely by the active evil of a few, but by the widespread, uncritical “stupidity” of the masses.

Key points of the theory:

  • Stupidity is not an intellectual deficit, but a moral and ethical one. Bonhoeffer distinguishes stupidity from mere ignorance. A stupid person is not simply uninformed; they are someone who has voluntarily surrendered their capacity for independent judgment, critical thinking, and self-reflection.
  • Stupidity is socially induced. It arises and spreads in specific social conditions, particularly under the pressure of terror, propaganda, and the intoxication of the people. In such an environment, people “give up their autonomy,” outsourcing their thinking to a leader or ideology.
  • The danger: An evil person can be reasoned with, exposed, or fought because they operate with a purpose and an understanding of reality. A stupid person, however, is immune to reason and facts. They are incapable of seeing contradictions or learning from experience. Because they are convinced of their righteousness and lack any self-doubt, they become “unshakeable and self-assured,” making them unpredictable and highly dangerous enablers of tyranny.
  • It makes people powerful and powerless at the same time. Stupidity grants a perverse sense of power to the individual (as part of a mob), but it simultaneously makes them utterly powerless as an independent moral agent. They become a tool for destructive forces without even realizing it.

Bonhoeffer warns that when people abandon their duty to think for themselves, they become more destructive than the outright malicious. The greatest threat is not the evil regime alone, but the masses who, through a chosen stupidity, allow that evil to flourish unchallenged.

His reflections are found in his prison writings, most notably in the letters compiled in Letters and Papers from Prison.

Western politics is all theatre. You’re watching a show. Your life is a lie.

We are not citizens; we are an audience. We are not participants in a democracy; we are consumers of a spectacle. The stark, cynical declaration that “Western politics is all theatre” is not merely a jaded observation; it is the most accurate diagnosis of our political malaise. We are living inside a meticulously crafted lie, a grand illusion designed to pacify and distract while the real levers of power operate in the shadows, untouched by the cacophony of the stage. To understand this is to understand that your life, your political agency, and the future you are sold are, in large part, a fabrication.

The stage is set daily. The floodlights of the 24-hour news cycle illuminate the parliamentary floor and the press conference podium, where our elected actors perform their scripted roles. The scripts are not written for the betterment of the nation, but by partisan scribes whose only commandment is to win the narrative. Complex, existential challenges (economic disparity, a collapsing healthcare system, ecological crisis) are ruthlessly compressed into soundbites and social media fodder. Nuance is the enemy; emotional resonance is the goal. We are not asked to think, but to feel outrage, fear, or tribal loyalty. The politician’s carefully curated persona, their relatable anecdote, their perfectly timed anger, is all part of the character study, a performance designed to make us forget that we are electing a commander-in-chief, not a season’s breakout television star.

The plot of this never-ending show is a manufactured war: Red Team versus Blue Team. This artificial dichotomy is the engine of the drama, a conflict so relentlessly amplified that it becomes the entirety of politics. We are conditioned to see the other side not as fellow countrymen with differing opinions, but as existential villains. Parliamentary debates descend into theatrical grandstanding, where speeches are delivered for the cameras and the base, not for colleagues across the aisle. Votes are held on doomed legislation not to govern, but to force the opposition into a politically damaging posture, creating another clip for the evening’s outrage segment. This is not governance; it is professional wrestling with a bigger budget and more dire consequences. The fierce, seemingly intractable battle makes for compelling viewing, ensuring we remain glued to our seats, terrified that the other side might win.

But who directs this show? The corporate media serves as both the stage and the melodramatic narrator, with a commercial vested interest in keeping the conflict boiling. Their currency is not truth, but engagement. A sober, policy-heavy analysis dies in the ratings; a scandal, a gaffe, or a heated confrontation goes viral. Pundits and spin doctors, the modern-day court jesters, are paid to interpret every event through a partisan lens, reinforcing the audience’s preconceptions and selling the simple, comforting narrative of good versus evil. This creates the illusion of choice: a vibrant, chaotic marketplace of ideas, while in reality, the entire debate is confined to a narrow, managed spectrum. You are free to choose your channel, but you are still watching the same fundamental show.

This brings us to the most devastating part of the lie: the illusion of your own agency. You are led to believe that your vote is the sacred instrument of change, that you are the director of this national story. This is the foundational myth that sustains the entire theatre. In reality, while you are distracted by the circus in the capitol, the true architects of policy (the lobbyists [6], the corporate donors, the unelected regulatory captives) are drafting legislation in backrooms and funding the campaigns of both leading actors. The set may change from a ‘Hope and Change’ blue to a ‘Make America Great Again’ red, but the backdrop of perpetual war, corporate welfare, and spiralling inequality remains eerily constant. The show provides the sensation of seismic shifts, while the underlying structure of power is fortified, unmoved and unaccountable.

This is not a call for apathy, but for awakening. To recognize the theatre for what it is, is the first, most radical act of defiance. It is to rip down the backdrop and see the stagehands for the first time. The solution is not to boo from the seats or to turn off the television in despair. It is to storm the stage. True change has never been born from the centre of the spectacle, but from its fringes; in grassroots movements, local organizing, unions, and acts of civil disobedience that operate outside the managed narrative. Stop being a spectator. Reject the script. Question the plot. Seek power not at the ballot box alone, but in your community, your workplace, and your own critical mind. The show is designed to make you feel powerless. Recognizing it as a show is the first step to reclaiming your power. The curtain must fall. Your life is a lie.

Finally, to soften the mood, a bit of music:

戴玉强老师巅峰《今夜无人入睡》Dai Yuqiang’s peak performance of “Nessun Dorma”  https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1XXXbYyEQP/  
Guangzhou Opera House 2016
In 1924, Puccini set his opera Turandot / Nessun Dorma in Pechino (No one sleeps in Beijing)
At 2:00 Dai Yuqiang is starting his “Vincerò” Victory.


鞠昕瑶(Ju Xinyao)  performing a solo guitar version of the song 《原来超人也会老》 (It turns out that Superman also grows old) as a tribute to her father.  The cover version by鞠昕瑶 (Ju Xinyao) changes the lyrics from a romantic perspective of the original song (《超人》(Chāorén) by Wǔyuètiān (Mayday 五月天) to a deeply personal one about a child’s realization of their father’s mortality and aging, making it a powerful tribute to her father. It was a campus singer competition program where music school students from various universities formed groups to compete.
This song is currently extremely popular in China.
https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Zp4y1p7Wv/

中国第一夫人彭丽媛演唱的歌《阳光路上》China’s first lady Peng Liyuan “Sunshine Road”
This is a patriotic song performed by Peng Liyuan, composed by Zhang Hongguang with lyrics by Jia Ding and Wang Xiaoling.
https://youtu.be/L2d8wsFXUvY?si=Efa7He58yx7Pyfji
Xi Jinping and Peng Liyuan married in 1987. Interestingly, before Xi Jinping rose to China’s top leadership position in 2012, Peng Liyuan was actually the more famous of the two. She was already a celebrated soprano singer and performer in China.

经典二胡协奏曲   Classic Erhu Concerto   梁祝 The Butterfly Lovers
許可  Xu Ke playing the 二胡  Erhu
Part 1   https://youtu.be/KMCLj-UGSzI  
Part 2   https://youtu.be/0rJEe0gs5K4

Thank you for reading! We’d love to hear your thoughts. Please share your comments here below and join the conversation with our community!

本文中文版：
Dit artikel in het Nederlands: Leven in een illusie

Endnotes

[1] An “almost catatonic incapacity to conceive the future” is a description of a state where the forward-moving, future-oriented part of human consciousness has become paralyzed. It is a hallmark of the most severe forms of psychological suffering, where the person is trapped in an eternal, hopeless present. It is like being so psychologically devastated that the very mechanism of envisioning “what comes next” (a core driver of human thought and behaviour) is in a state of paralysis.

[2] Aurelien in “It gets worse” 06/08/2025  https://aurelien2022.substack.com/p/it-gets-worse

[3] Xinhua report “Colonisation of the mind: the means, roots and global perils of US cognitive warfare” 02/09/2025
https://english.news.cn/20250907/52998b0f27704866af2a66f5df6577dd/80c86fe8e8484a989451aa09d30dabdb.pdf

[4] SL Kanthan “Colonization of the Mind; The Means, Roots, and Global Perils of U.S. Cognitive Warfare” 14/09/2025 https://medium.com/@slkanthan2030/colonization-of-the-mind-the-means-roots-and-global-perils-of-u-s-cognitive-warfare-18d36afb326e

[5] Dietrich Bonhoeffer “Theorie der Dummheit.” 1945 https://gedankenwelt.de/dummheit-ist-gefaehrlicher-als-bosheit-bonhoeffers-theorie-der-dummheit

[6] Frans Vandenbosch 方腾波  “The Lobbying Landscape in Brussels“  12/01/2025 https://yellowlion.org/lobbying-in-brussels/