Implicit faith in, and blind subordination to, Munich and Manhattan agitators

In 1944, the U.S. Army funded a series of American Historical Association pamphlets titled "What Is Propaganda?" The series came with helpful subtitles such as "Defining Propaganda," "Democratic vs. Enemy Propaganda," and "News and Propaganda," which is particularly at issue today. Unlike Fox News and the right's sundry cyberprint publications, good reporting, explained the pamphlet's author, "knows that the critical reader — one decently supplied with facts and having some knowledge of propaganda methods and purposes — can do his own job of separating the wheat from the straw."

The "News and Propaganda" primer — itself a propagandistic weapon of the war effort on behalf of sublime American values — underscored less the reporter's obligation than that of the judgment-tasked reader's: "[Circumspection] is the citizen’s responsibility and his privilege in a democratic society." Therein lies a judicious distinction: In a free, thriving democracy the privilege of independent thought is bestowed on the news consumer; his or her civic responsibility is to exercise it. Any top-down imposition of thought, which implies a bottom-up acceptance of others' thought, is unAmerican.

Which brings us to another of the wartime pamphlets ("What Are the Tools of Propaganda?") and, especially, its breezy observation that "The near-deification of Hitler by the Nazis and the technique of mass hypnotism of the Germans are things that we, as a democratic people, find it very difficult to understand." Puzzles the author:

"To us it is incredible that a fanatical, intense, uneducated Munich agitator, unschooled in economics and politics, should be exalted by mass appeals and terroristic tactics into an all-powerful and 'infallible' leader … who exacts unquestioned obedience from his people….

"Why did large sections of the German public come to accept this legend of the Munich agitator? One historian thinks that it was because millions of Germans were yearning for 'an end of all thought, will, or action on their own part' … [and so all] they had to do was to give [Hitler] 'implicit faith and blind subordination.'"

Whatever our difficulty in understanding the near-deification of a hideous mortal and the mass hypnosis of a people, it remains incredible that an intense, uneducated Manhattan agitator, unschooled in economics and politics, should be exalted by mass appeals and awarded unquestioned obedience from his people. Incredible indeed, although his people's compensation most assuredly lies in their now-satisfied yearning for an end of all thought and will.

It is into the vile mortal's hands that They the Hypnotized People have transferred all their hates, prejudices, disaffections and run-of-the-mill psychoses. He's as boorishly bughouse as they are, and in that sense, he deserves their respect; likewise they're as ignorant as he is, so in the same sense, they honor his anti-intellectualism.

The upside to all this is that in 17 days, we can tell them both to go straight to hell.

 

Comments

[Anne J]

Well I certainly hope so. I can hardly look at news anymore with stories about dems dropping in the polls, an abusive drunk on the supreme court, and violence endorsed by an abusive president. It's just getting too scary and depressing and not good for my mental illness symptoms.

[Peter G]

If you like your humor black then it should be noted that Trump was ostensibly schooled in economics at an otherwise reputable university.

[David & Son of Duff]

"The upside to all this is that in 17 days, we can tell them both to go straight to hell."

But will you? Of course, you and your fan club will do but ... but ... what about about all those, er, "deplorables"? You know, your, er, "fellow Americans" whom you utterly despise and hate. And if they have the temerity to disregard your 'diktat', then what will you suggest? Re-education, perhaps, or a more selective voter roll?

I haven't the faintest idea how the vote will go but I can't wait to find out!

[Peter G]

Let us clarify the chicken before the egg question. Trump did not beget Trumpers. He correctly assessed that they would not care if he murdered somebody in broad daylight. That obviously includes all lesser and included offenses like lying. Quite recently I thought that evangelicals might turn on him if he and the Republicans failed to overturn Roe vs Wade. I recognized that the Republicans loved the issue as a fund raiser and divider even though they knew actually doing it would be politically disastrous. But I did assume that the evangelicals who back Trump were tolerant of his complete and utter deplorability because they hoped for that one thing, overturning Roe vs Wade.

I am now convinced that was wrong. They are no different from your run of the mill Trumpers. They love him because of his ignorance, his lies and his assholishness and not despite it. This is not a contest between intellectuals. It is a contest between smart people and not smart people manipulated by wolves who would and will eat their own flock of sheep. And it is a battle being fought all over Europe by the domestic know-nothings there.

[Peter G]

Fair enough. I am looking forward to what will happen when Corbyn becomes Prime Minister. Given the evolving disaster that is Brexit this seems a pretty safe bet.

But while you are here Duff perhaps you could explain why white supremacists aren’t deplorable? Perhaps you could poll your troops for the answer that will elude you.

[The Dark Avenger]

Accept the rule of the majority vote, old boy.