Nikola Tesla famously said, “If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration.” These secrets include both negative and positive energy. For the universe to be balanced, there’s a “yin and yang” effect that pulls both directions so that balance can be obtained. We see this effect in male vs female, hot vs cold, light vs dark, wet vs dry, etc. Imagine what it would be like to have only men living on the earth or being surrounded in darkness 24/7.
The title of this article might make you wonder how lying is even a frequency. The most obvious answer is that all energy has a response with a following action. Previous articles on this site show that our thoughts, intents, actions, and words all create a frequency. Lying creates a negative frequency while truth creates a positive frequency. What we say and do comes directly from our subconscious that then connects to our heart and brain. We put into practice what’s in our hearts through our words and actions. There’s one problem… our actions can differ from our words. Therefore, actions are often more of a barometer for who we are on the inside that are "practiced" and have become habits. Words are the predecessor to actions as we live them out. This is one reason the saying "actions speak louder than words" rings with truth.
It is now the end of November in the year 2024. The United States just had a major presidential election. I’ll take a deep dive into the two main candidates for our example. The focus is mainly on actions vs words. When the two don’t line up, there’s “trouble in River City” (sing along now). I’m a neutral person politically so I’ll refer to the candidates by numbers rather than names. This is to help see past any preconceived “party bias.” To find balance, we must have an open mind, let go of expectations, and not let our emotions set a skewed paradigm of who a candidate is or might be.
We begin by reviewing the original statement about yin and yang. Every politician lies and every politician tells truths. Both candidates this year spewed some interesting stuff across the political aisle so neither exhibited exemplary behavior. But I must ask the question… which candidate’s words tended to line up more with their actions? Let’s begin with the two conventions – the Democratic National Convention (DNC) and the Republican National Convention (RNC). I’ll not say which candidate is which party. That’s for you to figure out.
Democratic and Republican National Conventions
Similarities between the two conventions: The conventions included well-known people of influence, political figures, those who’d overcome horrible life circumstances, celebrities, and those who changed from one political party to another. The chosen candidates spoke on the final night and both conventions lasted four days with the candidates accepting the party’s nomination on the last night. Great celebrations followed the conventions. In a sense, both the DNC and RNC were similar in how they did business. I watched several online sources (news, podcasts, etc.) so I could gather the general vibe and "tone" of each convention.
If you want to know what's really going on, it's highly recommended that you pay attention to sources that don't match your policial leanings. This way, you hear both perspectives.
Candidate #1:
This convention was filled with joy, laughter, and much celebration. There was an obvious theme for each night. Candidate #1 was in attendance every day of the convention. Every speaker told a story that focused on the nightly theme. Many spoke of hardships and how they’d overcome fairly negative circumstances. As is usual for most political conventions, the speeches ended with an endorsement of Candidate #1. That is, all but one speaker. He directly spoke to Candidate #1, asking the candidate to consider the working class.
What was different about this convention from previous years? The speakers focused more on the issues, agenda, and policies rather than the views of Candidate #2. Yes, the agenda of Candidate #2 was alluded to but there was no character assassination of the candidate. The opposing candidate’s name was only mentioned twice. Every speaker stuck with the theme, clearly bringing out the details of how their speech tied in with the policies that Candidate #1 proposed to the American people.
My assessment? All the speakers were positive, even when speaking about hardship. Even through describing sorrow, the state of America, and sharing heartfelt stories, one was left with hope for the future by the final night of the convention. Candidate #1 spoke for over an hour and often repeated or reiterated previous statements. The speech started out powerful but seemed to end with a bit of rambling.
The overall "vibe" of this convention was of a hope for the future. There was a major push for unity with a recognition that the country is indeed divided. Candidate #1 addressed the concerns of the people which made them feel heard.
Candidate #2:
This convention was themed the “joy” convention. Candidate #2 only attended on the first and final nights. Each day of the convention began as a party with a lot of cheering, music, and dancing. One could feel the joyful vibe as people let loose. As the nights wore on, the vibe shifted, which was apparent in the facial expressions of the audience. Although I missed a few speeches, the ones I heard all took harsh jabs at Candidate #1. The change of energy was palatable.
What was similar to Candidate #1? Each speaker told a story that fits within the joy theme. However, the focus quickly shifted to how bad the opposing candidate would be for the American people. Groundwork was laid showing how Candidate #1 would be a threat to democracy. After a while, I lost count on how many times Candidate #1’s name was brought up in a negative context. Online sources later said it was at least 400 times over the course of the convention. The convention ended with Candidate #2 echoing the previous sentiments of the various speakers. The focus turned from joy and hope for the future to the anxiety of a possible outcome should Candidate #1 be elected.
My assessment? This is where I go back to asking the question… do words line up with actions? How can you talk about being joyful and hopeful when you’re constantly bashing the opposing candidate? There was a complete disconnect between the emotion of joy and the scorn of rejection. It was rather confusing hearing speakers “joyfully” talk negatively about Candidate #1. This convention gave us a glimpse into the future of this political party.
The speeches seemed empty because the facial expressions often didn't match the words and body language of the speaker. This left me feeling a bit confused. The theme of this convention never seemed to materialize, at least through the internet. It may have been different for those who attended in person.
Before the Election
Candidate #2 and the mainstream media went after Candidate #1 with lots of horrible accusations. IF the accusations were true, it would mean the end of democracy as we know it. The attacks were meant to “fear” the American people into voting for Candidate #2. The “narrative” was repeated incessantly to assure voters wouldn’t lose track of the dangers Candidate #1 posed for the country.
It was difficult to get a genuine sense of Candidate #2’s policies because when interviewed, the answers were never clear or were left unanswered. In the final days of the campaign, the theme of joy had all but disappeared. I never saw any ads for Candidate #2 but I believe that’s because they were on TV and I don’t watch TV. As a former teacher having given many essay exams, I'd give Candidate #2 a failing grade for never answering a question. Candidate #1 at least wove an answer into comments for the grade of a "C+" or possibly a "B-" only because direct answers were rarely given.
Candidate #1 called Candidate #2 unflattering names and/or silly nicknames. This included the vice presidential candidate as well. Candidate #1 focused more on policies but then got creative by taking negative comments hurled at the campaign and turning them into silly and funny memes and/or ads that were posted throughout social media. Rather than attack Candidate #2's policies, many ads simply included videos of the candidate in earlier Q&A's and speeches that may not have been remembered by voters. The goal appeared to be allowing Candidate #2’s own words speak for themselves.
The 2024 presidential election was like watching a live soap opera with many twists and turns along the way. After the final bouts of mudslinging and cries of democracy never being the same again, one candidate was elected the 47th president on November 5, 2024. A wide variety of reactions came from both happy and angry Americans – some entertaining while others were quite sad. Angry people say and do some pretty dumb stuff, which provides insight into the depths of their hearts.
Was the Frequency of Lying Present?
Many media outlets sided with Candidate #2 and did everything possible to spew propaganda about Candidate #1. The media made it sound like America is going to be destroyed should Candidate #1 win. Plain and simple, this is how fear tactics work. Fear is always laced with lies but may also include partial truths. Those who engaged with fearful news day and night were exposed because they spewed the same propaganda (word for word) during after-election rants on various social media outlets. If a political candidate can get you to focus on a probable negative outcome through fear, you’ve fallen victim to the spell of propaganda.
Many YouTubers took to the streets before the election to ask the public who they were voting for. Nearly 100% of those supporting Candidate #1 were joyful in nature and had lighthearted comments. They were able to say why they didn't prefer Candidate #2 and provided examples of how Candidate #1 could change America. Those who supported Candidate #2 were nervous, often angry, and repeated the rhetoric (word for word) spewed by the media. They also couldn't offer answers as to why they didn't like Candidate #1. And, many were "single policy" voters, meaning that one thing about Candidate #2 won their vote.
The convention of Candidate #2 started with a theme of joy and hope. I was left confused after the ending of the convention because what the speakers presented didn’t line up with joy or hope at all. Why? You can’t say you’re joyful out of one corner of the mouth while calling someone an idiot out of the other. It felt like joy and hope were forced rather than genuine. In the end, my assessment played out because the negativity overrode the positive. What was within people’s heart eventually came forward. Candidate #2 never seemed to connect with the American people, which didn’t match with what was spoken during interviews. Again, there was a disconnect between actions and words. Who was Candidate #2 really? I’m not sure anyone ever fully understood because words and actions never lined up.
Candidate #1 had a slightly different issue. Words hurled toward Candidate #1 were less disparaging but were still not necessary. However, the kindness toward the regular voter didn’t go unnoticed. The goal appeared to be showing the American people how the next administration might look. The issues of the voters were discussed with real answers (although sometimes long winded) given to those who asked. There was definitely a connection between Candidate #1 and the general population but… that may have been because Candidate #1 made more public appearances than Candidate #2 (interviews, podcasts, showing up in strange places, etc.). By the end, those who looked beyond the surface could feel lightheartedness intermixed with a bit of fun and mischief within the entire campaign of Candidate #1.
Conclusion
My assessment? We all have opinions, our own ideas, expectations of others, and ideas of how things should work. It's all based on personal perspective and life experiences. Therefore, I can safely say that nearly every American went into the 2024 election with some sort of pre-conceived idea of how the election SHOULD turn out. Nearly half the nation went into some form of meltdown mode when their candidate lost. I ask the question... how many of these people actually listened to the views of those from the other campaign? I was shocked when some suggested that people don't spend time with family over the holidays who voted for the wrong candidate. This was even suggested on at least one news outlet! What kind of nutty behavior is that!?
Plain and simple - fear is laced with lies. Therefore, the frequency of lying is embedded into fear wherever it may raise its ugly head.
How do we stay away from the frequency of lying? First, disregard fear tactics no matter where they come from. Fear is meant to gain control. We saw this during what I call the "mess of 2020." The news media has become quite adept at this tactic. Lies kill and destroy your destiny. When we live out of fear, we’re always waiting for the next bad thing to happen. This attitude leads to “dis-ease” in the spirit, soul, and body. It’s no wonder that the world is currently having so many heath issues.
Secondly, when people speak of peace, joy, love, or other positive emotions, do their actions line up with their words? If not, then what they say should be taken with a grain of salt. Those words lead to an "in kind" action because people eventually act out what they say. We saw the process begin after the RNC and DNC conventions. One candidate became stronger as it got closer to election day while the other weakened. I'm guessing a bit of fun with genuine joy had something to do with that.
Political parties are quite good at using fear to “force” people into voting one way or another. Fear causes an adrenaline rush, which people can become addicted to. The media must pay their bills by assuring ratings stay solid. What brings the highest ratings? According to many research studies, it’s negative reporting because people have become addicted to fear. However, we saw a shift during the 2024 election as several networks lost massive numbers of viewers due to the rhetoric of fear-based propaganda spewed toward Candidate #1.
The moral of this story? Lies eventually destroy. We don’t know how the 47th president of the US will govern. Based on behavior behind closed doors (with friends, family, co-workers, etc.), we get a glimpse of how this presidency will play out. Although negativity was spewed toward the losing candidate by many Americans, those words seemed to attack the ACTIONS of the candidate, not the character. In assessing the words of the losing candidate, the attacks were leveled at the winning candidate’s character as well as previous actions.
It’s OK to disagree yet still honor an opposing view. This is how balance is brought to any system. The behavior of future presidential campaigns must shift to what a candidate brings to the table rather than attacking the other side. This includes the media, which is supposed to be unbiased. About 48% of the country was left devastated while the other 50% rejoiced at the outcome of the election. What can we do to unite the country? It starts with looking fear directly in the face. We learn to subdue it with a love that overrides the lies that fuel fear. Instead of negatively reacting, choose a different response and watch how it changes your life as you practice releasing love, joy, and peace into your spirit, soul, and body. Then, go hug someone on the losing team and tell them it will be OK. Love people where they are, encouraging them to focus on what's good even in a negative situation. I wouldn't be saying it's possible without having done it myself. You got this!
Take some time to listen to opposing views and find the hidden gems in what’s spoken. Who knows, you might learn something! When you begin to recognize fear tactics, turn and walk away. Bring balance into your life by paying attention to views you disagree with. Make friends with people that don’t think like you politically. Start conversations with what you do agree upon and let it flow from there. This way, you build honor and respect for other individuals who have different ideas from you. In high school, we practicied this technique in “debate class” where we heard two opposite perspectives so we could form our own opinions about a topic. When we’re constantly listening to one view only, we lack balance within any situation. This makes us more susceptible to fear and the lies it carries with it. Plainly put… don’t feed the fears!
Del, November 2024
Corresponding video on the Healing Frequencies Music YouTube channel