The Outrage Machine: How NCI, Narcissistic Power Grabs, and Political Rhetoric Are Turning Americans Against Each Other
If someone wanted to break a country from the inside, they wouldn’t start with tanks.
They’d start with:
Victimhood narratives
Outrage on a loop
Demonized enemies
And finally, permission for violence
You’re watching this play out right now in the United States:
from attacks on ICE facilities and bullets literally marked “ANTI-ICE,”
to the assassination of Charlie Kirk,
to National Guard soldiers shot in Washington, DC,
and a background of ongoing violence in cities like Chicago and Los Angeles. Facebook
Behind the chaos is a playbook—a fusion of:
Neuro-Cognitive Intelligence (NCI) and its PCP model (Perception → Context → Permission)
The classic four-step path of psychopathic narcissists to dictatorship
And a weaponized media environment that rewards rage and division
This is an exposé so you can see the pattern clearly—and refuse to be turned into someone else’s weapon, no matter which side you’re on.
NCI and the PCP Model: Perception → Context → Permission
In this context, NCI stands for Neuro-Cognitive Intelligence.
NCI is a behavioral and influence framework—popularized in PSYOP, intelligence, and high-level behavior training—that focuses on:
How people perceive information
How they interpret it within a context or story
What their brain then feels it has permission to do
The core formula is brutally simple:
Perception → Context → Permission (PCP)
Perception – You are shown carefully selected images, stories, and symbols until your emotional baseline changes (rage, fear, disgust).
Context – Those emotions are placed in a story: this is war, this is fascism, this is survival.
Permission – Once the story is internalized, your mind quietly grants itself moral permission to act in ways you never would have before.
Used ethically, this can help in negotiation, de-escalation, or leadership.
Used cynically, it becomes programming, not persuasion.
Social media supercharges this: content that triggers moral outrage spreads faster and gets amplified more than calm, nuanced explanations. Government Executive Facebook youtube.com
Outrage has become the cheapest lever in the human brain—and the entire information ecosystem is built to pull it.
The Narcissist’s Four-Stage Path to Dictatorship
Layered on top of NCI is a psychological pattern you just described:
how psychopathic narcissists use chaos to build dictatorships in four stages:
Radicalization – Manufacturing Victims and Heroes
They tell unsuccessful, alienated, or marginalized people that they are systematically oppressed and that only the would-be tyrant truly “sees” them.
Victimhood becomes armor for the narcissist: everything is done “in the name of the oppressed,” no matter how ruthless.
Destabilization – Mobilizing the “Victim Army”
Once the victim narrative sticks, they urge their followers to tear down the status quo: institutions, traditions, norms.
They demand the transfer of power from supposed “oppressors” to the “liberators”—i.e., themselves.
Chaos is no accident; “chaos is a ladder” for them to climb into every part of society: government, academia, media, corporations.
Crisis – Exploiting Emergencies to Centralize Power
They manipulate or manufacture crises—war, public health emergencies, economic disaster.
Under the banner of “restoring order” or “keeping you safe,” they centralize power in their own hands.
Citizens, exhausted and confused, hand over control to the very people who helped create the chaos.
Normalization – Purges and Permanent Fear
Once power is secure, dissent becomes “extremism,” “terrorism,” or “hate.”
They purge critics, imprison opponents, even turn on their own former foot soldiers who start to wake up.
A new “normal” is imposed where only those who enforce the tyrant’s doctrine are safe.
George Orwell warned exactly about this logic:
“One does not establish a dictatorship to safeguard a revolution. One makes the revolution to establish the dictatorship.”
And his chilling image of the future:
“A boot stamping on a human face—forever.”
The warning is simple: don’t be the foot that’s in the boot.
How Segments of the Left Are Using This Playbook Against ICE and the Right
This narcissist-dictator script and the NCI PCP model are not left-wing or right-wing by nature—they’re tools. Anyone can use them.
But if we’re honest, we have to look straight at how segments of the American left have deployed these tactics in ways that track disturbingly well with NCI and the four-stage model.
1. Radicalization: Painting ICE as Monsters
For years, some prominent Democrats and progressive voices have compared ICE to:
“Nazis”
The “Gestapo”
“Secret police”
Homeland Security officials and Trump-era DHS leaders have repeatedly warned that this kind of rhetoric dehumanizes ICE officers, who are often military veterans or immigrants themselves. They connect this rhetoric to a huge spike in assaults on ICE personnel—hundreds of percent increases over previous years.
That creates Perception: ICE are not fellow Americans enforcing laws; they are monsters, “kidnappers,” “fascists.”
2. Destabilization: “This Is Fascism, This Is War”
Within activist spaces, the narrative often becomes:
“We’re fighting fascism.”
“Detention centers are concentration camps.”
“This is another Nazi Germany.”
That’s not a policy disagreement—that’s a war framing.
From an NCI standpoint, this is a textbook Context shift:
Before: “I hate these policies.”
After: “We are in a fight against genocidal fascists.”
When you accept that framing, your internal rules shift.
Extreme tactics begin to feel necessary.
3. Permission: Bullets Marked “ANTI-ICE”
Once perception and context are set, Permission follows—particularly among the most unstable and radicalized:
In 2019, an armed activist attacked an ICE facility in Tacoma, attempting to blow up a propane tank.
On July 4, 2025, suspects in tactical gear allegedly lured officers out at the Prairieland ICE Detention Center in Texas and opened fire, wounding a police officer; several now face terrorism and attempted-murder charges.
In another 2025 attack on a Dallas-area ICE facility, reports describe bullets marked “ANTI-ICE” and investigators treating the shooting as a politically motivated, anti-ICE terror attack.
The rhetorical progression is clear:
Dehumanization in speech → Demonization in narrative → Justification in the mind → Violence in the real world.
The PCP model is all over this:
Perception: “They’re Nazis.”
Context: “We are resisting fascism/genocide.”
Permission: “Attacking them is not only allowed—it’s heroic.”
The Six-Lawmaker “Illegal Orders” Video: Principle or Pre-Programming?
Now add another piece: the video by six Democratic lawmakers—all with military or intelligence backgrounds—telling U.S. troops they must refuse “illegal orders.”
On November 18, 2025, these six Democrats released a video saying, in essence:
“Our laws are clear: You can refuse illegal orders. Do not follow unlawful orders.” ABC News Government Executive
The context in which this video landed is what makes it explosive.
One of the clearest examples of PCP-style psychological influence in the current moment is the video released by six Democratic lawmakers with military/intel backgrounds, telling U.S. service members that they must refuse “illegal orders.”
On its surface, this sounds harmless—even obvious.
Under U.S. law and the Uniform Code of Military Justice, no soldier is required to obey an unlawful order. That’s basic civics.
But in influence operations, the text is only half the message. The timing, targeting, and framing carry the real payload.
Perception: Trump = “The Guy Who Gives Illegal Orders”
The lawmakers didn’t cite a specific statute or ongoing court ruling.
They released this video in the middle of a media storm over President Trump’s actions, rhetoric about “retribution,” and controversial military or security decisions.
To the average viewer—especially a young enlisted soldier scrolling social media—the emotional takeaway isn’t:
“In theory, one must refuse unlawful orders under any administration.”
It’s:
“Trump’s orders are probably illegal. You should be ready to say no to him.”
That’s the Perception piece:
Trump is portrayed implicitly as a man who cannot be trusted to issue lawful orders.
The viewer is primed to associate Trump = unlawful commands, even when none have yet been tested in court.
Context: From Chain of Command to “You vs. a Rogue President”
Next comes Context.
The video doesn’t arrive in a vacuum; it’s layered onto years of messaging that:
Call Trump a threat to democracy
Accuse him of plotting a coup, dictatorship, or military takeover
Portray his supporters as extremists or dangerous radicals
Within that narrative, the lawmakers’ message functions less like a neutral civics lesson and more like a soft call to preemptive resistance:
“You’re not just a soldier—you’re the last line of defense against a lawless president.”
That reframes the relationship between the Commander in Chief and the rank and file:
Before: “I follow lawful orders from the chain of command.”
After: “I personally judge whether orders from this president are legitimate at all.”
That’s a powerful context shift. It subtly moves the mental frame from:
Constitutional chain of command → personalized suspicion of one elected leader.
Permission: Seeding Doubt in the Ranks
Once the Perception (Trump = likely unlawful) and Context (you vs. a rogue president) are in place, the final step is Permission.
The video plants a seed:
“If something doesn’t feel right, you are justified—even heroic—for refusing it.”
Again, in pure legal theory, that’s not wrong.
But in practical, emotional terms, that seed can grow into:
Second-guessing routine, lawful orders because they come from “the wrong” president
Deepened mistrust within units split along political lines
A readiness in some to disobey first and justify later, especially if activist media or partisan voices declare an order “illegal” in real time
From an NCI / PCP perspective, the sequence looks like this:
Perception: Trump is uniquely dangerous and lawless.
Context: You are no longer just under command; you’re a moral check on presidential power.
Permission: You can—and maybe should—disobey orders if you believe they’re wrong, especially if they come from him.
That is classic destabilization:
It erodes confidence in civilian control of the military.
It turns what should be a clear legal standard into a politicized, emotional filter.
It sows seeds of doubt and potential disobedience right where a would-be strongman—or a would-be revolutionary—needs them most: inside the armed forces.
Whether you see the six lawmakers as patriots or partisans, the influence pattern is unmistakable:
They leveraged a legally true statement (“don’t follow unlawful orders”) to shape perception of Trump, reframe the context of military obedience, and open a door of permission for selective resistance.
That’s exactly how Perception → Context → Permission works when it’s used to soften a system from the inside.
The NCI / Dictator-Playbook Angle
From a rule-of-law perspective, the content of the message is technically correct: illegal orders must not be followed.
From an influence-ops perspective, however, the timing and targeting matter:
The video does not cite a specific illegal order, but it appears amid intense criticism of Trump’s Venezuela strikes, domestic deployments, and “retribution” rhetoric. Reuters
It is framed as a warning against Trump specifically, not a neutral civics lesson.
It is delivered by elected politicians who are already part of a narrative that paints Trump as uniquely dangerous, lawless, and authoritarian.
Combine that with the narcissist-dictator playbook:
Radicalization: Convince people they are fighting a would-be tyrant.
Destabilization: Encourage doubt in the chain of command—especially when “their guy” is not in charge.
Crisis: Point to controversial strikes, deployments, or domestic uses of the military as proof of lawlessness.
Normalization: Make it feel normal and even virtuous to treat orders from a sitting president as presumptively suspect.
The same message—“do not follow unlawful orders”—can be:
A legitimate safeguard against real tyranny, or
A pre-programming nudge that plants the seed: “If Trump is the one giving the order, it’s probably illegal.”
In a hyper-charged environment, it’s naïve to pretend this is purely neutral.
Whether you see the six lawmakers as heroes defending the Constitution or politicians edging toward soft mutiny, the NCI mechanics are unmistakable: shaping Perception of Trump, shifting Context around his authority, and potentially influencing the Permission structure inside the minds of service members.
When Demonization Turns to Blood: Charlie Kirk and the DC Guardsmen
These dynamics aren’t theoretical.
On September 10, 2025, conservative activist Charlie Kirk was assassinated by a sniper while speaking at Utah Valley University in what authorities call a politically motivated killing. Facebook Financial Times
In late November 2025, two National Guard soldiers deployed near the White House were shot; one, Specialist Sarah Beckstrom, was killed. The suspect—an Afghan evacuee—appears to have been radicalized after arriving in the U.S., possibly through online content. Al Jazeera
Different ideologies, different backgrounds—but the inner script is the same:
Perception: “They are part of an evil system.”
Context: “This is a battlefield; I am fighting tyranny/oppression/occupation.”
Permission: “I’m not a murderer—I’m a soldier in a just war.”
This is exactly what the narcissistic-dictator model warns about:
manufactured crises + victim armies + demonized enemies = political violence.
“If You Want a Picture of the Future…”
Orwell’s line is blunt:
“If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face—forever.”
The boot is the centralized power structure.
The face is the ordinary citizen.
And the leg inside the boot is built out of:
Polarized citizens
Radicals convinced they’re righteous
People who have been taught who to hate, what to fear, and which orders deserve obedience
The terrifying irony is that both sides accuse each other of heading toward dictatorship—while both are tempted to grab more power “just this once” to stop the other.
As Orwell put it:
“One does not establish a dictatorship to safeguard a revolution. One makes the revolution to establish the dictatorship.”
The revolution could be red or blue. The boot looks the same from underneath.
How Not to Become the Foot in the Boot
You can’t control presidents, parties, or media giants.
But you can refuse to be programmable.
1. Watch the PCP Pattern Everywhere
Whenever you feel whipped into fury, quietly ask:
Perception: What images and stories am I being shown on repeat? Who chose them, and what did they leave out?
Context: Is this being sold to me as war, apocalypse, fascism, or genocide? Does everything suddenly sound existential?
Permission: What am I starting to feel “allowed” or “morally obligated” to do that I never would have justified before?
If you can see the pattern, you’re harder to use.
2. Reject Dehumanization—Even Against Your Enemies
You can hate policies without branding entire groups:
“Nazis,” “vermin,” “traitors,” “subhuman,” “slaves,” “cattle.”
Every time you accept that language, you move one step closer to justifying political violence—from your side or against you.
3. Break Isolation and Echo Chambers
The narcissist playbook and NCI exploitation thrive on:
Isolation (no real tribe)
Echo chambers (fake community, one-sided narratives)
Repetition (rage on a loop)
Fight that by:
Building real-world relationships, including with people who disagree with you.
Reading long-form information from multiple perspectives—not just 30-second clips.
Taking regular breaks from feeds designed to make you feel angry, hopeless, or superior.
4. Respect Lawful Authority—But Keep Your Oath to the Constitution
Both things can be true:
Service members and citizens must refuse clearly unlawful orders.
Constantly framing a specific president, agency, or party as inherently illegitimate can pre-program people to see any order from them as suspect, which is its own form of destabilization.
If you’re in uniform, your oath is to the Constitution, not to a man—or to a party that wants to weaponize you against that man.
The Bottom Line
Neuro-Cognitive Intelligence (NCI) and the PCP model explain how people move from seeing something, to believing they’re in a do-or-die struggle, to feeling justified in doing things they once thought unthinkable.
The psychopathic narcissist’s four-stage path to dictatorship explains how:
Victimhood is weaponized.
Institutions are destabilized.
Crises are exploited.
Purges and fear become normal.
Right now, segments of the left are plainly using victim narratives and extreme rhetoric—especially against ICE and conservative figures—in ways that are feeding real-world violence. At the same time, the fight over the six-lawmaker “illegal orders” video shows how even legally correct messages can be absorbed into a larger war over who counts as legitimate authority. Reuters ABC News The Washington Post
If you don’t want to end up with a boot on your face, the first step is making sure you’re not the one wearing it.
That starts by refusing to let anyone—left, right, or “revolutionary”—tell you:
Who you must hate
Who you’re allowed to dehumanize
And when violence suddenly becomes “moral”
You can’t stop the outrage machine from existing.
But you can stop it from running on your nervous system.
References
Brady, W. J., Crockett, M. J., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2021). How social learning amplifies moral outrage expression in online social networks. Nature Human Behaviour, 5(11), 1510–1524. Facebook
Carpenter, M. (2025, November 25). FBI probes Democrats who urged US troops to defy illegal orders. Al Jazeera. Al Jazeera+1
City of Chicago. (2025). Chicago crime statistics, 2024–2025.
FactCheck.org. (2025, November 25). Experts say Democratic video not “seditious,” as Trump claims. FactCheck.org
Los Angeles Police Department. (2025). Crime and homicide data for Los Angeles, 2024–2025.
MediaWell / Social Science Research Council. (2025). Why we fight for fractured truths: How misinformation fuels political violence in democracies. youtube.com
Mihailov, E., Voinea, C., & Vică, C. (2023). Is online moral outrage outrageous? Rethinking the indignation machine. Science and Engineering Ethics, 29(12).
Reuters. (2025, September 11). Conservative influencer Charlie Kirk shot dead in ‘political assassination’. Facebook Financial Times
Reuters. (2025, November 27). Trump says one National Guard member has died after Washington, DC, shooting. Al Jazeera
Spotlight PA. (2025, November 26). FBI is targeting Dems who urged troops to reject illegal orders, at Trump’s urging. Spotlight PA
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2025, June 21). DHS reports surge in assaults on ICE agents, blames political demonization.
U.S. Department of Justice. (2025, July 8). Ten charged with attempted murder after organized ambush on ICE detention center and police officer in Alvarado, Texas.
Washington Post. (2025, November 30). Hegseth conscripts the Pentagon for Trump’s “retribution campaign.” The Washington Post
Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. PublicAffairs. youtube.com
