History shows that unchecked power—whether political, technological, or ideological—rarely ends well. Governments and institutions, when allowed to operate without oversight, have used psychological operations, propaganda, and systems of control to influence public perception and maintain authority. These tactics have been used by authoritarian regimes, democratic societies, and intelligence communities alike—sometimes for defense, sometimes for manipulation.

Today, that influence is magnified by technology. Companies like Google, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Meta (formerly Facebook), and Elon Musk’s Starlink control massive portions of the infrastructure we rely on every day—search engines, satellites, social media platforms, AI systems, mobile devices, and even the algorithms that determine what we see and how we communicate. These corporations are not elected by the people, yet they shape public thought, access to information, and personal privacy. Their decisions are often made behind closed doors, with minimal public accountability.

At the same time, we’ve seen repeated examples—across both Republican and Democratic administrations—of leaders and institutions evading transparency:

• The NSA surveillance programs, exposed by Edward Snowden, revealed massive, unregulated government monitoring of citizens.
• The use of private servers and personal email accounts by Secretary Hillary Clinton sparked national debate about secure communications, transparency, and equal treatment under the law.
• The mishandling of classified documents by former President Trump has led to ongoing legal scrutiny.
• The recent Signal chat incident, involving high-level officials allegedly discussing military action on an unsecured messaging app—with a journalist mistakenly included—raised questions about operational security, decision-making, and honesty, especially as key figures denied the event afterward.

These incidents are not isolated. They point to a deeper issue—a pattern of uneven accountability, where the rules seem to change depending on who holds power.

More troubling, though, is the growing trend of personal allegiance to political figures or movements overtaking loyalty to democratic principles. It’s understandable that people feel frustrated with broken systems or political overreach. It’s human nature to want someone to step in and fix it. But history reminds us: when a single leader or brand is placed above the system itself—above checks and balances—democracy begins to erode.

The “Make America Great Again” movement, or MAGA, is a prime example. It’s a powerful phrase—one that no reasonable person would disagree with in principle. Of course, improving a country, making it stronger, more secure, and more just, is a worthy goal. But MAGA has also become a brand, a carefully engineered identity that has come to represent not just a political idea, but an allegiance to a single figure—Donald Trump. And while it’s fair to desire something better, it’s dangerous when that desire turns into unquestioning devotion to a person, rather than a thoughtful commitment to shared values and constitutional principles.

There’s a difference between supporting a cause and losing oneself in a political brand. Our country is great—its innovation, influence, and resilience are proof of that—but it is also at a pivotal moment in history. Technology, power consolidation, and political polarization are rapidly reshaping how we function as a society. The question we should be asking is not just, how do we make America great again?, but what does greatness actually mean in today’s world—and how do we preserve it for everyone?

One way to answer that is to reflect on what we stand for—not just in symbolism, but in substance. Take the American flag, for example. Do we honor it because of the way it looks? Because of its colors? Or do we remember the real struggles behind it—the sacrifices made, the lives lost, the battles fought, and the imperfect but meaningful progress that has brought us to this point?

It’s easy to forget history in a world flooded with headlines, social media posts, and curated content. But real freedom has always come at a cost, paid by those who endured the hardship, loss, and injustice of previous generations. Those sacrifices aren’t abstract. They belong to people—many of whom never saw the change they helped create.

We don’t honor them by idolizing symbols or slogans. We honor them by learning, improving, and protecting the systems they fought to build. It’s important to direct our anger and energy at true adversaries—those who threaten our values, our safety, or our freedom—not our neighbors, not fellow citizens, and not even the government itself, which despite its flaws, has carried us this far. The goal isn’t destruction. It’s progress.

This mindset exists across the political spectrum. We see it in both Republican and Democratic circles—where individuals seek to discredit, silence, or suppress opposing voices. When disagreement turns into destruction, we all lose. Civic discourse breaks down. Institutions weaken. Freedoms slip away.

We must remind ourselves that leaders deserve respect, but never blind loyalty. Our values—not personalities—should shape our decisions. Accountability must apply to everyone, regardless of party, influence, or wealth.

I believe in reform. I believe we can make government more efficient, transparent, and ethical. But real change doesn’t come from loyalty to a person or brand—it comes from building systems that outlast individual leaders and uphold the standards we expect.

I also believe in the power of education and understanding. Many people fear what they don’t understand—especially when it comes to AI, algorithms, surveillance, and advanced tech systems. Sometimes that fear is valid, but more often, it can be reduced through learning, curiosity, and honest conversation.

That’s why I try to study the technology that affects our daily lives. The more we understand it, the harder it becomes for anyone—government, corporation, or political movement—to manipulate us.

Let’s stay curious. Let’s stay committed to truth. And let’s remember: the survival of a free society doesn’t rest solely on what leaders do—it rests on what the people allow.