Manufactured Chaos and the Erosion of Democracy

I don’t think the administration fears civil unrest.

I think they’re counting on it.

Because civil unrest gives cover.

It justifies militarized responses.

It reframes peaceful dissent as “public safety threats.”

It creates the conditions where extraordinary measures suddenly feel “necessary.”

And once that door opens, the playbook is familiar:

•Escalate force

•Blame protesters

•Declare order is at risk

•Normalize military presence

•Question whether elections can even be “safely” held

That’s not paranoia. That’s history.

If you want to delay elections, undermine turnout, or create a legal argument for postponing midterms, you don’t start by saying it out loud.

You start by manufacturing instability — or letting it spiral while pretending your hands are clean.

Here’s the part people don’t want to hear:

Uncontrolled rage, smashed windows, and reactionary violence don’t threaten power —

they serve it.

They hand authoritarians exactly what they need:

“See? We tried restraint. Now we must act.”

This is why discipline matters.

This is why facts matter.

This is why peaceful protest isn’t weakness — it’s strategy.

They want chaos.

They want images.

They want justification.

Don’t give it to them.

Hold the line.

Protect the process.

And stop mistaking emotional release for resistance.

History doesn’t remember who was loudest.

It remembers who stayed focused when provocation was the point.