Have you ever noticed how a place stops being called a community and suddenly becomes a demolition site? How do homes turn into unsafe zones? It’s not random—it’s a tactic. And the scariest part? It works.
When phrases like “It’s dangerous.” or “Why would they return?” are repeated enough by people in power (you know who), they will slowly, very slowly, stop sounding like opinions and start feeling like facts. When these words come from the top, they carry weight. People accept them without question, assuming that they must be true. The more we hear it, the more normal it seems. This phenomenon is known as the illusion of truth effect or truth effect; repeated statements are often perceived as more valid than novel ones, regardless of their actual truthfulness.
That’s exactly how the Overton Window shifts. What used to be unthinkable slowly gets accepted as necessary or practical. The Overton Window is the range of ideas society considers acceptable. And once it shifts, people barely notice. What was once outrageous is now just common sense.
However, some intentions aren’t just about controlling public perception, it’s about shutting down the opposition before it even starts. Who’s going to speak up when the dominant narrative makes disagreement sound ridiculous? Those in power who do see the problem stay quiet, thinking that they’re the only ones. And those who stand to gain? They just go along with it, pretending it’s “just how things are.”
And then there’s the worst kind of justification, the one that makes you look like the villain for questioning it. “I’m rebuilding the place. If you disagree with me, then you don’t care about the people.” It’s manipulative because it frames the issue as if there’s only one way forward: their way.
Never mind the fact that this person in power intended to claim ownership of land that was never theirs to begin with, taken through means so corrupt or violent that no one could outrightly justify them. Never mind that the original people of the area were forced to leave under the pretext that it was too dangerous to stay. And even after the so-called rebuilding, they are still not allowed to return, with the excuse that they have already “settled” elsewhere.
Photo by Leag Milis/Reuters
We’ve witnessed this. Just recently, a world leader casually fed the idea of taking over an entire region, and promised to transform it into the “Riviera of the Middle East”, as if land seized through destruction could be rebranded into a luxury development project. And what about the people who live there? Well, according to him, they can go somewhere else. After all, they’ve already been displaced, so why should they return?
I’m sure that we all will have a common perception that those ideas sound totally absurd. But they were created for those very small populations and local context—those who already lean toward supporting the ideology. The goal isn’t widespread acceptance; it’s to start the debate. Once that happens, all the authorities have to do is ignite a small flame and let those in favor fuel the fire. Suddenly, an idea that should have been outrightly dismissed becomes a topic of discussion. The more it is debated, the more legitimate it appears.
This is the reason why arguing against this is incredibly difficult. Not only do they have strong internal support, but even leaders (especially that so-called most powerful person on the planet) from other countries back them, whether out of strategic interest, political convenience, or simply because they can. When enough voices echo the same justification, it stops feeling like a lie. The more people accept it, the harder it is to challenge.
And the worst part? No one even has to force this to happen. Sometimes, all it takes is inaction. Reports get published, statements are made, yet if the people in charge do nothing, the end result is the same. The illusion of resistance exists, but the dominant narrative still wins, such as “This is complicated” or, “Both sides are to blame” or worse, “They brought it upon themselves” planted by the people/bots itself through social media comment sections or by the media outlets.
At some point, we stop questioning. We shrug and assume nothing can be done. That’s how ideas spread, not through force, but through convenience. It’s simply easier to accept things as they are.
Here is where the real danger lies. Once a story is rewritten enough times, it replaces the truth entirely. And when that happens, what’s left to fight for? If we don’t start questioning these narratives now, we may wake up one day to find that the version of reality we live in isn’t ours anymore—it’s theirs. Now is the time we start opening our eyes, not just educated about the ongoing current issues but getting familiar with their games.
So what can we do? Especially for those of us watching from afar, like me, a Malaysian student studying in the UK. Resisting doesn’t always mean protesting. Sometimes, it begins with having strong values and morals. Quiet, steady convictions that don’t bend under social pressure.
It’s also about building real connections with both local and international peers. Get to know them, understand their perspectives, and gradually introduce the conversation around Palestine-Israel. Not by shouting slogans or aggressively calling out, but by approaching the topic with professionalism and empathy. If they share your view, great. If they don’t, focus on earning their respect with how you handle the argument. Stay composed. Don’t escalate.
Because when people see that you stand firm and communicate with dignity, your words carry more weight. This isn’t just about winning debates—it’s about planting seeds, shifting perspectives, and showing that resistance can be thoughtful, grounded, and humane.
Yes, they started the game, so we played it. If they plant Oleander seeds (Beautiful red-pinkish flower yet poisonous), then we do the same. We plant dandelion seeds (spread by the wind), and more importantly, we can water them. Through conversations, connection, composure. Every word matters.
Disclaimer: Everything stated in this article is the writer’s opinions formed based on the current narrative surrounding the most-talked war today. The writer recommends reading the Overton Window shift as it provides more insights as to how public narratives are manipulated and changed over time.
Reference:
https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2025/2/10/us-committed-to-buying-and-owning-gaza-trump-says
