Thread: The Engineering of Consent

Noam Chomsky is an idiot.

If there wasn't propaganda in the world, there wouldn't be war. When you look at history and modern times you realize that people do not like war, and they try to avoid it at all cost. However if you look at all the wars we have been in, they are started with propaganda campaigns against the public that drum up support for the war. Eventually people realize they are being manipulated and eventually support for war starts to drop. Almost all wars start because someone in the government has some ambition to start war, and so they use propaganda to build support.

People who use propaganda, especially fear propaganda, make me sick. I really think they are the most vile of people in the world. People like Joseph Goebbels were seen as war criminals, and rightly so. However people forgot that there was people in the US at the time just like him, and there are still people like that today. They would have you believe that the people serve the government, and we should support our government in whatever it deems necessary to do. That is total bullshit though. The government serves us, the people.

Lying to the public should be grounds for immediate dismissal from any public office. And if bad enough should be a criminal action that results in their arrest.

I do not believe for a single second that any of this stuff is for the public's own well being. No one thinks the public is dangerous if left alone. It is all about, how can they make more money, or gain more power. I truly believe that propagandist are as close to real evil as you can get in the world. The are greedy selfish and disgusting people, who seek to control other people. Often harming the people in the process. Only a truly sick person could discover a way to steal from you, and make you enjoy being robbed.

Originally Posted by SpecialInterests

"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ...We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. ...In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons...who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind."

There is a documentary called "the Century of Self" about Edward Bernays and the history of PR and psychoanalysis that covers alot of these topics. Propaganda is inescapable, even if we were to state "propaganda is bad" we are still spreading propaganda. But propaganda isnt necessarily always a bad thing, its a method for spreading information but unfortunately its has been used for nefarious purposes in the past hence all the negative connotations attached to the word "propaganda!" (i dont even want to type it anymore) Do I believe that humans are fundamentally irrational and dangerous requiring us to be led? To a certain extent yes I do but I think this behavior is also a result of civilization. I think we are too dependent on having other people to make decisions for us. Civilization has made us weak and stupid not the other way around as is commonly believed (Ex: Most people dont know how to procure food for themselves in the wild because we have others who do that for us therefore our dependence on civilization has caused us to become disassociated with our most basic natural instincts). I think people are capable of living autonomously without leaders in small communities but we need to first start becoming independent from the government.

And also Noam Chomsky is most certainly not an idiot, he has made significant contributions to philosophy of mind and linguistics. If you are referring to his political views(I lean to the left politically myself but I do have disagreements with his views on anarchism,pacifism,etc) then I kinda agree but I wouldn't say he is unintelligent.

Originally Posted by Alric

The are greedy selfish and disgusting people, who seek to control other people.

I agree, but not all propagandists are like this. Some are just confused people who really believe in what they are supporting, like christian propagandists for example. The idea of controlling people doesn't even come into their mind, they just have to do what is Right.

Originally Posted by SpecialInterests

Edward Bernays (nephew of Sigmund Freud) was listed as one of the top 100 most influential people in the 20th century by life magazine, credited as "the father of public relations", and yet, not a lot of discussion about him. He argues in his book "propaganda" that being able to manipulate the opinion of the masses is a essential element of democracy:

Wow. This made my eyes bug out a little. I'll have to look into this guy. I've been meaning to read the Chomsky book by the same title but I've been busy not reading other books lately. [Nevermind, I meant manufacturing of consent.]

I agree propagandists are heinous people. I also think that most propagandists are just so deeply indoctrinated themselves they don't even know what they are doing. I mean, propaganda is everywhere, there is so many people involved and to various degrees. That's what is really scary to me, it's like a viscous circle.

Thanks for the name of that documentary Storm I'm going to check that out.

What exactly constitutes propaganda?

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Propaganda is a form of communication aimed at influencing the attitude of a community toward some cause or position. As opposed to impartially providing information, propaganda in its most basic sense, presents information primarily to influence an audience.

I don't see propaganda as a bad thing, as long as it's used for a good cause. Propaganda is simply getting people to feel strongly about some issue. Shit, 90% of the driving force behind the capitalistic economy is corporate propaganda, trying to get everyone to think their products are the best thing since sliced bread. Propaganda is also used in nationalism. I'd rather everyone be proud to be an American than for everyone to be thinking, 'eh, we're alright.. but nowhere near as good as China.' If that were the case, we wouldn't be the world power right now. (Whether or not that's the best thing for the world, well that's a different story) It's best for us to think that we're the top dogs. If the entire country was always divided, we'd never get shit done, and we'd spend most of our time arguing. Just take a look at Congress.

However, I don't think that propaganda should be used in advocating wars or violence, among other things which I'll discuss later. I think that wars should be approached from an entirely objective state of mind, so that as a country we can make the best decision as opposed being falsely led to believe that we're not just fulfilling the government's private agenda concerning war efforts.

I can't disagree with you more. Propaganda by corporations and nationalism are both bad things. Propaganda has no place in capitalism as far as I am concerned. Ideally you buy a product because it actually is a good product, not because you were tricked into thinking it was good product. People should be rewarded for filling the needs of consumers, not selling them crap and calling it great. Nationalism is dangerous, and it is the very thing that leads us to wars and stuff. Nothing good comes from it. You say it stops arguments, but we need people to debate laws and stuff. Stopping debates so you can shove new laws down the throats of America, is a horrible thing.

You have to realize that the majority of our economic growth is caused by 'exaggerated' advertising. If corporations always offered the best things available in terms of current research and development, our economy would be developing at a much slower rate than it is today, which would in turn slow the rate at which research and development takes place. This makes the element of corporate propaganda a necessary component of capitalism. Also, you don't take into account the element of competition. If rivaling businesses sold the exact same thing, how would they be able to convince the consumer that they should buy their product instead? There would be no appeal, which would further stunt our economic diversity and growth.

By the way, I do see your point about nationalism, and I have to agree when I think about it.

First off a slower yet more stable rate of growth is a good thing, as opposed of the boom bust cycles that we artificially make with market manipulation. Because the huge rapid increases always results in sudden periods of contractions, like we are in today, where everyone loses their job and is making a lot less. And everyone losing their house and becoming poor isn't good for the economy. Secondly, all products are never going to be equal. And if they are there are other things to separate companies besides them lying. There is the costs of products, customer service and how much support the give, warranties and stuff like that.

I don't believe at all, that lying to people is needed. That is just an excuse and a lazy approach to sales.

Originally Posted by DuB

What exactly constitutes propaganda?

To be honest I've kind of wondered that myself. That wikipedia definition seems to be lacking something if you ask me, "a form of communication" doesn't really tell you much. I'd call it any information produced with the intent and goal to convince people of something to fulfill someones interests. I guess by its very definition it's not inherently bad, but it's come to carry some negative connotations, and that's what I think people are referring to when they speak of propaganda today - the insidious species of propaganda that is employed by the elites to control masses of people. The type that works to convince you by speaking to your irrational emotions, sell products to your feelings and not your intellect, that sort of stuff. That's what I label propaganda anyway.

Originally Posted by SpecialInterests

To be honest I've kind of wondered that myself. That wikipedia definition seems to be lacking something if you ask me, "a form of communication" doesn't really tell you much. I'd call it any information produced with the intent and goal to convince people of something to fulfill someones interests. I guess by its very definition it's not inherently bad, but it's come to carry some negative connotations, and that's what I think people are referring to when they speak of propaganda today - the insidious species of propaganda that is employed by the elites to control masses of people. The type that works to convince you by speaking to your irrational emotions, sell products to your feelings and not your intellect, that sort of stuff. That's what I label propaganda anyway.

How about the pledge of allegiance? Forcing little kids to swear allegiance to their government. Isn't that a bit worse than McDonalds ads?

Originally Posted by cmind

How about the pledge of allegiance? Forcing little kids to swear allegiance to their government. Isn't that a bit worse than McDonalds ads?

Actually, the pledge of allegiance swears allegiance to our country, not our government. If everyone was forced to swear allegiance to their government, then I'd have a serious problem with it.

Originally Posted by MindGames

Actually, the pledge of allegiance swears allegiance to our country, not our government. If everyone was forced to swear allegiance to their government, then I'd have a serious problem with it.

Huh?

I pledge Allegiance to the flag
of the United States of America
and to the Republic for which it stands,

Either way it creates nationalism.

I've always thought that this is propaganda/ a way to indoctrinate children to have nationalist tendencies. What mcDs does is worse on one level because it doesn't cause wars, but on another level it's the same, it's mind control through a constant succession of images. Mcdonalds is fucking everywhere, and there food is total shit. Influencing people's minds like this on a mass scale is fucked up and dystopian, I don't like it one bit.

Granted it isn't brainwashing or real mind control, I'm using the word like a propagandist might to make my point seem more dramatic, but it does have an strong effect on many many people.

It is definitely a hard question. Literally every person who tries to convince others that their position is correct and should be copied is guilty of using propaganda. No matter what the circumstances, every individual has at least a slightly different idea of what is true. Propaganda is one of the ways in which we reach consensus and thus create the reality that we live in. Basically what you are saying when you say "Propaganda is evil" is "the pervading world view in my community is evil". If this is true, how do you combat it? Only with your own propaganda, of course. Propaganda is a tool, and tools cannot be inherently evil or good, only the people who use them can.

That is only true if you take the word to the literal extreme. One could make the case that expressing any opinion in an attempt to change people's mind is propaganda, but that isn't generally how the word is defined. When we use the word propaganda we usually mean trying to convince people with half truths, and lies.

So if you get into a debate and you are not lying, then you are not guilty of anything. If you get in a debate and you are mistaken, then that is just a mistake and hopefully the other person will convince you. If you get into a debate and you know what your saying isn't true and you play on the persons fears, and emotions and lie to their face so they will do what you want, then that is propaganda and it is evil.

Propaganda is a tool like murder is a tool. One that should never be used. If you can't win a debate with facts and the truth, then your position probably wasn't worth holding.

Okay, so on that definition, what is the difference between propaganda and simply lying? Or does the argument really just reduce to "lying is evil"?

Originally Posted by DuB

Okay, so on that definition, what is the difference between propaganda and simply lying? Or does the argument really just reduce to "lying is evil"?

It's more than just lying, it's lying done on a mass scale to create a mass effect, like to start a war or make a bunch of people buy some bullshit product they don't need and won't really satisfy them. It's clearly worse than lying, and I think there are obviously situations where lying is of benefit to all involved, whereas propaganda usually is done to benefit a small group and to take advantage of most people.

I'm not sure that I see how lying en masse is qualitatively different from lying singly.

Can propaganda sometimes be used for noble purposes? Or is that contrary to the definition--that is, lying en masse is propaganda if and only if it is to serve ignoble purposes?

It's different because of the effects. Even if you are succesful in getting people to do something positive with propaganda it's not really that good because they are doing it under false pretenses. Eventually they will see through it and stop.

It can be used for noble purposes, but it is not the best way to go about things in my opinion. When your trying to do something good, like getting people to take care of the environment, I think it's best to stick with facts and rather than conning people into doing something.

So propaganda is evil. But propaganda can be used for noble purposes. So evil things can be used for noble purposes? If so, what does it really mean to say that something is evil?

I never said that it was evil, I believe my word choice was "fucked up". I just don't think it's a good way to go about doing things.

It is lying on a large scale to influence other people, and manipulating people into doing things they wouldn't normally want. And no propaganda can not be used for noble purposes. You might start off with good goals in mind, but eventually your good goals will be corrupted. It always results in bad things, and can never be used in a good way.

There is no noble goals involved at all. If you had noble goals, you would just speak the truth and people would listen to you because it is the right thing to do. If your using propaganda to influence people, it is because you know they would never listen to you otherwise. Usually because what you are saying is so horrible or stupid, that people want no part in it.

Originally Posted by Alric

There is no noble goals involved at all. If you had noble goals, you would just speak the truth and people would listen to you because it is the right thing to do. If your using propaganda to influence people, it is because you know they would never listen to you otherwise. Usually because what you are saying is so horrible or stupid, that people want no part in it.

This isn't exactly true. Propaganda is used extensively by the green movement and also by the anti-war movement. What they want to happen is good, but they do it in a stupid way because they don't trust people.