From Min Aung Hlaing’s bizarre beliefs to Donald Trump’s supernatural mandate, absurd claims are shaping public policies—and putting humanity at risk.

On 4 March, Min Aung Hlaing made his first official visit to Russia—official only after four unofficial ones, as no one, not even human rights skeptics like China or Thailand, wants to extend a formal invitation and risk international embarrassment.

It’s only fitting that those with a high tolerance for international embarrassment eventually face it head-on. The junta leader not only gifted Putin a book of horoscopes and six elephants but also made a bizarre claim about his past life—that he was a rat king who gave a mushroom to the Buddha.

Prachatai didn’t miss the chance to report on the issue to a Thai audience, whose demand for news on junta absurdities persists. Reactions flooded its social media, where, like social media in general, some of the most extreme expressions of humanity are laid bare.

While most of the reactions are mind-numbing, a few are worth noting. For instance, Thais should not forget that their own conservative counterparts once made a false claim that Putin had praised King Rama IX in grandiose terms as 'the great king who never fought against anyone' but could 'make the whole world surrender.' Needless to say, there is no evidence of such a statement.

While these absurd claims may seem like laughable nonsense, there’s an underlying pattern we risk overlooking to our own detriment.

As humans, we make decisions based on narratives. For better or worse, these narratives justify individual actions, shape public policies, consolidate power, and establish institutions.

At the individual level, it doesn’t hurt to occasionally give in to superstition. Consider the concept of pronoia—the opposite of paranoia—where one believes the world is conspiring to help them. A therapist noted that this mindset could be helpful for trauma survivors, particularly after they’ve made progress in their healing.

But the bigger the decision, the more dangerous the superstition becomes. ISIS has caused immense harm. Hitler saw himself as a messianic figure. The Russian Orthodox Church referred to Putin’s era as the "miracle of God." Before making claims about Putin’s past life, Min Aung Hlaing staged a coup and ordered protesters to be shot in the heads most likely based on astrological advices. Meanwhile, Min Aung Hlaing’s war machine continues to relentlessly kill civilians.

Trump claimed he survived an assassination attempt because God wanted him to save America. But that doesn’t mean his tariffs will work, let alone save the country.

Ha-Joon Chang, a prominent economist, has long argued in his books that “there is no such as thing as a free market.” In 1700, Britain, which he described as “a pioneer of protectionism,” banned imports from India to grow its textile industry. Similarly, in the US, Alexander Hamilton advocated for tariffs to protect its infant manufacturing sectors. However, this doesn’t mean protectionism is a panacea.

In a recent interview, Chang stated that the tariffs against Canada and Mexico are primarily used as leverage for border-related issues. However, when it comes to the tariffs imposed on China, the US is effectively shooting itself in the foot. Cheap Chinese products are a crucial component of the US's neoliberal economy, helping workers survive as their wages have been suppressed over the past 50 years.

Without cheap Chinese imports, inflation is on the horizon. US companies may gain more resources due to their ability to set prices in the absence of Chinese competition—at the expense of workers. However, this additional surplus is unlikely to be reinvested in manufacturing. Instead, as Ha-Joon Chang argues, it will likely be absorbed by what he calls ‘the parasitic financial system,’ benefiting shareholders rather than revitalizing domestic industry or supporting American workers.

In successful capitalist development, protectionism is often employed to nurture domestic industries, but it requires massive industrial planning by the government—far more substantial than Apple’s plans for a $5 billion investment, which stemmed from Trump’s conversation with Tim Cook.

At this rate, the burden of tariffs will fall on US consumers, already stretched thin by federal layoffs, budget cuts, and a failing healthcare system. Rather than stimulating domestic manufacturing, US industries will likely bide their time, hoping the tariffs will be lifted after the 2028 election. Meanwhile, the issue of income inequality will only worsen.

Public debate is challenging enough without the distraction of superstitious claims. Policies driven by astrological readings, divine mandates, or mythical narratives can destabilize societies and endanger lives. While we may laugh at these silly claims, it’s crucial that we focus on rational discourse to address the real issues at hand. Astrological readings may be fine, but let’s not allow them to influence government policies.