![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Noam Chomsky
The latest issue of The Sun magazine arrived in my mailbox the other day. It contains an interview of Noam Chomsky, the well known linguistics professor at MIT, and an equally well known political activist. The article focuses on Chomsky's view of American propaganda, particularly involving our conflict with Iraq. It's a fantastic interview, providing the reader opportunities for further investigation.
Q: Why did public-relations propaganda flourish in democratic societies?
Chomsky: Because governments there couldn't rely on force to control the population. If you can't control people by force, it becomes necessary to control attitudes and opinions. The public-relations industry was later imitated -- with varying degrees of success -- in Germany and Bolshevik Russia and South Africa and elsewhere. But these attempts were always based quite explicitly on the American model.
In 1933 a progressive Wilsonian named Harold lasswell -- one of the founders of modern political science --wrote an article called "Propaganda." (People used the term freely then, before it picked up negative connotations from the Nazis.) In his article, which was published in the Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, Lasswell said we should not succumb to "democratic dogmatisms about men being the best judges of their own interests." And since people are too ignorant to understand their best interests, his reasoning goes, great humanitarians like Lasswell must marginalize and control them. And the best means for doing this is propaganda. Propaganda, Lasswell said, is just a tool, as neutral as a pump handle. You can use it for good or for evil. And since he and his associates were noble, wonderful people, they'd use it for good --to ensure that the ignorant masses remained marginalized and separated from any decision -making. This is not the right wing that I'm talking about; these are the liberal, "progressive" intellectuals.
When Congress authorized the president to use force in October, it said that Iraq was a threat to the security of the United States. yet no other country regards Iraq as a threat. Even Kuwait and Iran, both of which have been invaded by Iraq don't regard Iraq as a threat to their security. As a result of the UN Sanctions, which have killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis -- probably two-thirds of the population is on the edge of starvation -- Iraq has the weakest economy and the weakest military force in the region. Its military expenditures are about one0third those of Kuwait, which has one-tenth of Iraq's population. And, of course, the real superpower in the region is that offshore U.S. military base known as Israel, which has hundreds of nuclear weapons and massive armed forces. After the u.S. takes over, it's very likely that Iraq will increase its military spending and maybe even develop weoapons of mass desruction just to counterbalance other states of the region. Particularly Iran. This administration will support the buildup just as the Reagan Administration and the first Bush administration supported Saddam Hussein's military programs, including weapons of mass destruction, right up to the day of his invasion of Kuwait.
The United States controls the hemisphere. It controls both oceans...the last time the U.S. was threatened was during the war of 1812. Since then, it has just conquered others. And somehow this incredible security engenders a fear that somebody is going to come after us.
I cannot do justice to the whole article. Anyway, if you see it in a bookstore near you, pick up a copy. It's the October 2003 issue.
Q: Why did public-relations propaganda flourish in democratic societies?
Chomsky: Because governments there couldn't rely on force to control the population. If you can't control people by force, it becomes necessary to control attitudes and opinions. The public-relations industry was later imitated -- with varying degrees of success -- in Germany and Bolshevik Russia and South Africa and elsewhere. But these attempts were always based quite explicitly on the American model.
In 1933 a progressive Wilsonian named Harold lasswell -- one of the founders of modern political science --wrote an article called "Propaganda." (People used the term freely then, before it picked up negative connotations from the Nazis.) In his article, which was published in the Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, Lasswell said we should not succumb to "democratic dogmatisms about men being the best judges of their own interests." And since people are too ignorant to understand their best interests, his reasoning goes, great humanitarians like Lasswell must marginalize and control them. And the best means for doing this is propaganda. Propaganda, Lasswell said, is just a tool, as neutral as a pump handle. You can use it for good or for evil. And since he and his associates were noble, wonderful people, they'd use it for good --to ensure that the ignorant masses remained marginalized and separated from any decision -making. This is not the right wing that I'm talking about; these are the liberal, "progressive" intellectuals.
When Congress authorized the president to use force in October, it said that Iraq was a threat to the security of the United States. yet no other country regards Iraq as a threat. Even Kuwait and Iran, both of which have been invaded by Iraq don't regard Iraq as a threat to their security. As a result of the UN Sanctions, which have killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis -- probably two-thirds of the population is on the edge of starvation -- Iraq has the weakest economy and the weakest military force in the region. Its military expenditures are about one0third those of Kuwait, which has one-tenth of Iraq's population. And, of course, the real superpower in the region is that offshore U.S. military base known as Israel, which has hundreds of nuclear weapons and massive armed forces. After the u.S. takes over, it's very likely that Iraq will increase its military spending and maybe even develop weoapons of mass desruction just to counterbalance other states of the region. Particularly Iran. This administration will support the buildup just as the Reagan Administration and the first Bush administration supported Saddam Hussein's military programs, including weapons of mass destruction, right up to the day of his invasion of Kuwait.
The United States controls the hemisphere. It controls both oceans...the last time the U.S. was threatened was during the war of 1812. Since then, it has just conquered others. And somehow this incredible security engenders a fear that somebody is going to come after us.
I cannot do justice to the whole article. Anyway, if you see it in a bookstore near you, pick up a copy. It's the October 2003 issue.