Did you know that every time you like or share a post or a page on Facebook, the social media network is using your choices to collect data on what it thinks your political views are?
In fact, it even has you labeled under a certain category, and in this video we’re going to tell you exactly how to find out what that category is.
Conservative, Moderate or Liberal? Those are the three options Facebook uses, and if you’ve used the social media giant for awhile, there’s a good chance it thinks it has you figured out.
How do you find out which label Facebook has given you? Start by logging into your account on the desktop version of Facebook. Then go to facebook.com/ads/preferences. Click on the “more” tab and then click on the “Lifestyle and Culture” tab. Then click “see more” and scroll down to the box that is labeled “US Politics.” The word beneath it in parentheses is the political label Facebook has given you.
How does Facebook create this label? It could be as simple as you “liking” a conservative politician’s page or following a conservative media outlet. Or it it could be as tricky as you “liking” a page that has nothing to do with politics, such as Target or Starbucks, and if the majority of their followers have been labeled as liberals, then you might be labeled as one too.
Why should you care? Facebook is using the label it creates for you to determine which ads show up in your newsfeed. And you might think, “I’m a diehard liberal, and I am perfectly fine with only liberal political ads showing up in my newsfeed,” but the problem with that logic is that by only seeing ads that are related to your political views, you are putting yourself in a bubble that makes you even more susceptible to becoming part of the false “left vs. right” narrative.
There’s also the chance that Facebook has given you the wrong label. With neoconservatism running rampant on the right and social justice warriors becoming more common on the left, few people are just strictly just “liberal” and “conservative,” and it raises the question, do we really want Facebook being the judge of our political affiliation?
Rachel Blevins is a journalist who aspires to break the left/right paradigm in media and politics by pursuing truth and questioning existing narratives. For story tips, contact firstname.lastname@example.org.
“And now let me tell you something that no other candidate for president will tell you. And that is, no matter who is elected to be president, that person will not be able to address the enormous problems facing the working families of our country.
They will not be able to succeed, because the power of corporate America, the power of Wall Street, the power of campaign donors, is so great that no president alone can stand up to them. That is the truth. People may be uncomfortable about hearing it, but that is the reality.”
Basically what he saying is that without the majority of people pushing for something, the president can’t make any progressive political momentum. He’s right. All presidents – despite their people-first rhetoric of “hope” and “change” that they use to get in to office – is just a figurehead puppet, constrained by private interests, the Federal Reserve, IMF, NSA, CIA, IRS, Congress, the Senate, the Supreme Court, etc, and essentially does whatever their advisers (who are involved in Revolving-Door Politics) say. He’s acknowledging that the system is completely corrupt and ineffectual.
But the truth is even worse than he’s letting on, since government not only blocks progressive social movements (anyone remember the Occupy Movement?), but it proactively hurts society- physically, psychologically, educationally, environmentally, etc- in order to maintain control. Ever since the 60’s, the government has sought to infiltrate, destabilize, and derail progressive social movements. Yet its means have since become far more widespread and insidious. The fact is that government seeks to undermine society by lowering standards of discourse, narrowing the margins of discussion, decreasing funding to education, spending over half the national budget on military, putting fluoride in the water which creates brain damage, holding no social accountability to the multinational corporations which comprise the social infrastructure, and the list goes on and on.
Bernie Sanders goes on to say:
“And that is why what this campaign is about is saying loudly and clearly- It is not just about electing Bernie Sanders for president, it is about creating a grassroots political movement in this country.”
So even though society is put at a severe disadvantage by government in every way, we’re just supposed to keep trying to overcome the tyranny of government by the limited means which that same tyrannical government regulates? That’s a trap.
The fact is that if Bernie Sanders actually believed in his own political rhetoric, he would not just sulk back in line quietly, giving public support to Hillary Clinton, because she’s as corrupt and dirty as it gets in the political system and he knows it! Anyone who truly abided by the conviction of urgency and compassion, he would ride the momentum of his campaign and go even further. Anyone with that supposed conviction and nationwide support would organize a peaceful protest across the country, marching not just towards the puppets in city hall, but all local mainstream media stations, the Federal Reserve Bank (which he never mentioned like Ron Raul did), and the houses of all corrupt political officials after having exposed their records. He would make a national movement for immediate accountability and cut out the established corruption which blocks significant progressive social movements, but he won’t. He’s completely hypocritical towards all the principles he claimed to to righteously uphold. Just like all politicians, Bernie Sanders has brought noting new to the table. He simply uses rhetoric which appeals to the indignation of the oppressed masses, even though he knows full well that “the corruption is too great.”
But at least he had one moment of complete honesty by admitting that the system is completely corrupt.
So are you ready to acknowledge it too, or will you keep validating the system by falling in the same political trap?
Humberto Braga is a professional visual artist, life coach, and author whose life is dedicated to facilitating an accelerated evolution of consciousness through providing practical knowledge, personal healing, social awareness, and holistic spiritual guidance towards truth, justice, freedom, and wholeness.
His work ties together several subjects and provides effective strategies to help actualize the best version of yourself and navigate the challenges of life, ranging from health, psychology, personal relationships, activism, society, government, voluntarism/ anarchism, environmentalism, paradigm shifts, metaphysics, and the hyperdimensional Matrix Control System.
Raised in Wisconsin through a very difficult childhood with only a single deaf mother, Humberto grew up constantly questioning “authority”, and seeing UFOs, extraterrestrials, ghosts, and other paranormal phenomenon which compelled him to seek answers to the deeper mysteries of life. Through willpower, research, and divine guidance, he’s transformed his life far beyond his greatest childhood dreams, and presently resides in Topanga Canyon, California, living an amazingly blessed and fulfilling life.
Neocons Fear Donald Trump Could Name Ron Paul As Secretary Of State – OpEd
On Wednesday, the neocon journalist Jennifer Rubin tweeted under the hashtag #thingstoworryabout. She is afraid Ron Paul will be selected as Secretary of State in a Trump administration.
Rubin, described as a “conservative” journalist, works for The Washington Post where she espouses the neocon line on foreign policy. As an advocate for “American exceptionalism,” she supports military intervention and the never-ending war on terror.
So far, Donald Trump has not said he will appoint Ron Paul as Secretary of State.
It’s a great idea, though.
As Secretary of State, Paul would rollback Pax Americana and pursue a policy of noninterventionism. He would follow George Washington’s advice and oppose entangling alliances with other nations and wars of aggression. Paul would bring the troops home from hundreds of US bases in Korea, Japan, Europe and elsewhere around the world. He would shut down foreign aid. He rejects the dangerous confrontation with Iran, the embargo against Cuba, and military actions elsewhere. He advocates ending US participation in the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Danny F. Quest, is an artist, blogger, journalist, and media personality. Co. Founder of TheTruther.us and author of “120 characters or less’ the guide to winning a debate in the digital age”. Danny now works as a Freelance journalist and graphic designer for WeAreChange.org. Danny’s next big project is “30 days in Gaza” a documentary bringing light to the current conditions of the Palestinian people living under Israeli occupation.