Tag Archives: Propaganda

“I Paid To See A Movie About Singing. I Got Ninety Minutes Of Pentagon Propaganda.” by Caitlin Johnstone

It’s a wonder we don’t have to stand for the National Anthem before movies. From Caitlin Johnstone at medium.com:

To cap off a long, strange day, my husband and I took the kids out last night to see Pitch Perfect 3. The first Pitch Perfect is a firm favorite in our household, the kind of movie we end up watching when we can’t agree on what to watch. We’d been waiting til we all had a night to see the latest one together, so we made a night of it and went out for some dinner, too. I even had a Coke. The sugary kind. This was a big night, people! So we were all in high spirits and I entered the theater excited to see some good music and have a good time.

I wasn’t expecting a masterpiece, but I also wasn’t expecting to be blasted in the face with ninety minutes of blatant war propaganda from the United States Department of Defense.

Before I go on I should mention that a group called Insurge Intelligence published a report a few months back on thousands of military and intelligence documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act which showed unbelievably extensive involvement of US defense and intelligence agencies in the production of popular Hollywood movies and TV shows. Just from the information this group was able to gain access to, the scripts and development of over 800 films and 1,000 television titles were found to have been influenced by the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA to advance the interests of the US war machine. We’re talking about big, high profile titles you’ve definitely heard of, from Transformers to Meet the Parents.

So it’s an established fact that these depraved agencies of destruction and domination are balls-deep in Hollywood production. You can understand my discomfort, then, as it became evident that the movie I’d sat down to watch with my family was set on US military bases for no reason whatsoever. There was nothing about the plot of Pitch Perfect 3 that required this; any music tour of any kind would have worked just as well. The antagonist had nothing to do with the military, the protagonists were a civilian a capella singing group, and the general conflicts and resolutions of the film were entirely uninvolved with anything related to the armed forces of any nation.

To continue reading: “I Paid To See A Movie About Singing. I Got Ninety Minutes Of Pentagon Propaganda.”

Advertisements

Happy New Year: Don’t Be Fooled By the Orthodoxies of the Messengers, by Doug “Uncola” Lynn

Here is Hollywood’s latest in political correctness. From Doug “Uncola” Lynn at theburningplatform.com:

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.

– Edward Bernays, “Propaganda”

Edward Bernays (1891 – 1995) was a famous pioneer in the field of public relations and is, today, often referred to as the Father of Propaganda. Perhaps Bernays became thus known because he authored the above quoted 1928 book titled with that very term. He was actually the nephew of the famed psychopathologist Sigmund Freud and was very proud of his uncle’s work. More than that, however, Bernays accepted the basic premises of Freud towards the use of emotional manipulation of the masses through advertising. It was, in fact, Bernays, who changed the term propaganda into “public relations”.

If the excerpt above from Bernays’ book “Propaganda” is true, then it would imply there are men of great power who utilize psychology in order to message and manipulate the minds of the masses. Are these the men that Thomas Jefferson, supposedly, once warned about? Indeed. They are the ones who control the issue of currency; the ones who first by inflation, then by deflation, caused the banks and corporations to grow up around the people thus depriving them of all property until the people’s children woke up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.

These are the men who financially and politically manage sovereign governments as well as the handful of corporations that control 90% of the media today.  It is not hard to imagine, therefore, why it would be in the best interests of these men to mentally maneuver the masses into complacency. But how is this psychological manipulation implemented?

Through lies, of course.

To continue reading: Happy New Year: Don’t Be Fooled By the Orthodoxies of the Messengers

A Critical Thinking Person Might Ask, by Jim Quinn

Spend too much time reading the Happy Days Are Here Again hosannas and then looking at actual real world numbers, and you’re sure to come away with a case of cognitive dissonance. From Jim Quinn at theburningplatform.com:

I know some people don’t like charts, but I think they tell stories. The two charts below tell a story the mainstream media, Trump, Wall Street, and the Deep State don’t want revealed. The first chart shows the year over year percentage change in personal income taxes collected by the Federal government and the second chart shows the year over year percentage change in corporate income taxes collected by the Federal government.

The government drones can’t seasonally adjust, massage, or fake these numbers like they can inflation and unemployment.

A critical thinking person might ask, how can the unemployment rate have fallen to levels last seen in 2007 if personal income taxes collected has been essentially flat for the last two years? The last time unemployment was supposedly this low, the Feds were collecting taxes at a 12% to 18% annual rate over the prior year. Either the BLS is lying about the unemployment rate or the jobs being added are nothing but low paying shit jobs.

A critical thinking person might ask, if the stock market is at record highs because the economy is doing so well and corporations are rolling in dough, why have corporate taxes collected by the Federal government declined for the last three years? Corporate taxes collected have declined because corporate profits are lower than they were three years ago. Have you heard that fact on CNBC? The market isn’t being driven by corporate profits, but just massive levels of Fed created debt, recklessly low interest rates, and a false narrative being spun by Wall Street, their media mouthpieces and even Trump.

To continue reading: A Critical Thinking Person Might Ask

US State Department admits that it plans to meddle in Hungary’s democracy, by Alex Christoforou

Russian meddling—bad! US meddling—good! From Alex Christoforou at theduran.com:

The Rex Tillerson State Department will pump $700,000 into Hungarian media to remove Viktor Orban

When another nation state uses media to communicate it’s point of view, its flagged as a foreign agent, a “bad actor”, and often declared as an “act of war (i.e. RT).

When the US government uses its petrodollar strength to insert its agenda into another country’s politics it’s branded “democracy and human rights programming”.

According to The Gateway Pundit, Rex Tillerson State Department is spending over $700,000 to defeat PM Orban in Hungary.

The deep state is vehemently opposed to Orban’s nation statism…his conservatism and his stance against open borders. For the neo-liberal cabal under the watchful eye of George Soros, Orban must go.

In his speech accepting his party’s endorsement, Orban said he was fighting against “globalist” views that threaten the EU’s Christian nations and their moral foundations, for which he blamed Soros.

“Some countries in Europe decided to transcend Christianity and their own national character,” he said. “They want to step into a post-Christian, post-national era.”

“To execute Soros’s plan they want to root out governments which represent national interests around Europe, and that includes us,” he said. “They act like Soviet agitprop agents once did. We old war-horses know them by their smell.”

Breitbart.com reports…

The U.S. State Department has courted controversy by announcing it will plough $700,000 into Hungarian media, angering the country’s anti-globalist, conservative government.

The funding was announced by U.S. Chargé d‘Affaires David Kostelancik, who has previously appeared to openly criticise the Trump administration by alluding to “apparent inconsistencies in [U.S.] foreign policy” and remarking that “not every criticism of the government is ‘fake news’.”

To continue reading: US State Department admits that it plans to meddle in Hungary’s democracy

The “Deep State” Then and Now, by Edward Curtin

Many of the histories written of the CIA and other intelligence agencies implicitly assume that the they are not still doing the dark deeds the history chronicle. In most instances that’s a faulty assumption. From Edward Curtin at lewrockwell.com:

“…since grasping the present from within is the most problematic task the mind can face.”

Frederic Jameson

Have you ever seen a photograph of yourself from the past and laughed or grimaced at the way you were dressed or your hair style? It’s a common experience.  But few people draw the obvious conclusion about the present: that our present appearance might be equally laughable.  The personal past seems to be “over there,” an object to be understood and dissected for its meaning, while the present seems opaque and shape-shifting – or just taken-for-granted okay.  “That was then,” says the internal voice, “but I am wiser now.”  Historical perspective, even about something as superficial as appearance, rarely illuminates the present, perhaps because it makes us feel ignorant and unfree.

This is even truer with political and social history.

In recent years there has been a spate of books and articles detailing the CIA’s past Cold War cultural and political propaganda efforts, from the creation of the Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF) with its string of magazines, to its collaboration with many famous writers and intellectuals, including Peter Matthiessen, George Plimpton, Richard Wright, Irving Kristol, et al., and its penetration and working relationships with so many publications and media outlets, including The New York Times, the Paris Review, Encounter, etc. These exposés show how vast was the CIA’s propaganda network throughout the media and the world, and how many people participated in the dirty work.

Joel Whitney, in his recently published book, Finks: How the CIA Tricked the World’s Best Writers (the word “tricked” ignores the eager accomplices), tells this scandalous story in illuminating detail.  His account informs and nauseates simultaneously, as one learns how the CIA penetrated NGOs, television, universities, magazines, newspapers, book publishing, etc., finding willing collaborationists everywhere – scoundrels eager to spy on and betray even their friends as they deceived the public worldwide; how well-meaning leftist writers such as Ernest Hemingway and Garcia Marquez were tricked into lending their names and work to propaganda publications; how leftists were set against leftists in an elaborate effort to sow paranoia and confusion that could be used to put the Soviet Union in the worst possible light; and how many front organizations were created to secretly funnel money to support these endeavors and make and break careers.  The story makes your skin crawl.

To continue reading: The “Deep State” Then and Now

Why 2017 Is Like 1969, by Charles Hugh Smith

Charles Hugh Smith considers the similarity between 2017 and 1969, and between Donald Trump and Richard Nixon. From Smith at oftwominds.com:

1969-2017: and here we are again, in so many ways.

A deeply polarizing new president, a disastrously misguided official narrative that the political Establishment doggedly supports despite a damning lack of evidence, and an economy teetering on the edge of recession–and worse.
Sound familiar? Welcome to 1969 redux. The similarities between the crises unfolding in 1969 and the present-day crises are not just skin-deep–they’re systemic.
Consider the basic parallels.
1. Nixon was if anything more polarizing than Trump. If there was any politician Democrats loved to hate, it was Nixon. Yet Nixon won a close race against an Establishment Democrat, at least partly because he ran as a “peace candidate” and because he spoke to the Silent Majority who disagreed with the nation’s direction. The Silent Majority was mocked and ridiculed by the mainstream media as racist, close-minded deplorables.
2. The Democratic Party had become the Establishment bastion of war-mongering. The Democratic White House had been obscuring its devastating strategic and tactical miscalculations behind a slick PR campaign and a pervasive and often illegal program of suppressing dissenters and whistleblowers.
3. At the behest of the Establishment, an immense propaganda machinery had been running full-tilt to paper over foreign-policy failures and tragedies (including but not limited to the Vietnam War). In 2017, this immense propaganda machine is focused on discrediting the Trump presidency by unearthing or fabricating evidence of collusion with our default Bad Guy, Russia.
4. The political Establishment had decided to tamp down discontent with the Vietnam War by borrowing vast sums to pay for both “guns” (the war) and “butter” (the Great Society social welfare programs). Paying for the war and a military capable of fighting one-and-a-half other wars (at that time, the Pentagon was geared to fight 2.5 wars) would have required some sacrifice in domestic spending, and that would have further inflamed popular resistance to the Vietnam War. The expedient (and predictably disastrous) choice was to ramp up deficit spending so no domestic sacrifice was needed to pay the crushingly high costs of the Vietnam conflict. In 2017, U.S. public debt basically doubled during the Obama/congressional guns and butter borrowing spree from $10 trillion to $20 trillion.
To continue reading: Why 2017 Is Like 1969

How Many Russians Do You Hate? by Robert Gore

“I ain’t got no quarrel with them Viet Cong.”  Muhammad Ali

How many Russians do you hate? Chinese? North Koreans? Iranians? Syrians? Yemenis? If, aggregated, your answer was zero, your answer is typical.

Perhaps you were rejected once by someone you loved, whom you wanted to love you. It’s surprising how quickly love can become hate. You hated, bitterly, for a long time. Then you realized your hate wasn’t just ineffectual—the hated one had moved on, oblivious to your antipathy—it was warping you, closing you off to the good that life offers. You were only hurting yourself, so you let it go, reopening the door to positive possibilities and opportunities.

If you couldn’t continue hating someone who hurt you, why would you hate any one of billions of people you’ll never know? It’s foolish, a waste of time and energy. Most people pursue their own opportunities, living and letting live…especially people they don’t know. It’s an important element of a well-adjusted personality. Wars and conflict get all the press, but the unrecognized history of the world is actually a more salutary chronicle. Through the generations, people in large measure have lived peaceably together, even people of different races, nationalities, and creeds. Peace, cooperation, and mutually beneficial exchange, not war and conflict, account for humanity’s journey from cave to skyscraper.

Who peddles, promotes, and profits from war and conflict? The people of Germany didn’t spontaneously make war against the people of Poland in 1939, nor the people of the United States against the people of Iraq in 2003. Germans and Americans may have supported those wars, but they were instigated by those in power. Almost all wars are, but are fought by people who have no use for them, who will bear most of the costs, and derive few if any of the purported benefits.

Hate is stoked to overcome the natural desires for peace and prosperity and aversion to war. As a leader, you don’t sit the citizens down one-by-one and calmly explain to them why they should hate whomever you’ve chosen to fight. Rather, you make a frenzied appeal to a crowd, and let crowd psychology work its woeful wonders, with ostracism and worse for the few rejecting the appeal.

FOR THOSE WHO LOVE…GREAT SATIRE!

cropped-prime-deceit-final-cover.jpg

AMAZON

KINDLE

Hate is the very foundation of war. Isn’t it also the very foundation of power? Certainly those in power would reject that formulation, but let’s come at the question from the other direction. If you hate someone, you wish the worse for them. You wish you could determine their fate, which left to you would be awful. Isn’t power the ability of one person to determine the fate of another? Has power generally been exercised to the benefit or detriment of those subjected to it?

Keep in mind that the exercise of power forcibly preempts the subjected’s own judgments about what’s best for themselves. You’d like to keep what you’ve earned; the state takes it. You’d like to live your life in the way you see fit; the state has its myriad regulations and punishments. You and another party would like to conduct a mutually beneficial exchange; the state bans, regulates, or dictates its terms. You want to live in peace: the state pursues war.

Now the state may claim that all it does is for your benefit, but aren’t you the best judge of what’s beneficial to you? Doesn’t this presumption that they know better than you do what’s good for you reek of insufferable arrogance? Think about your own experiences. Has anyone who obviously thought he or she was superior to you ever had your best interests at heart?

“I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.”
Linus Van Pelt, from the Peanuts comic strip by Charles M. Schulz

The last one hundred years has seen a parade of leaders and their henchmen demonstrating their professed love of humanity with guns, concentration camps, torture, gas chambers, forced famines, genocide, and other evils. In the twentieth century, humanity-loving governments have killed between 100-200 million of the people they couldn’t stand, and that’s not counting the wars. How high does the body count have to go before the conclusion generally takes hold that it’s the power and the killing and the death they love, not the people they subjugate? Or is that insight only reached when the person next to you—like you kneeling, his hands bound—takes a bullet in the back of his head?

Power, a mass murderer once noted, “grows out of the barrel of gun.” You shall know him, and everyone else with a gun trained at your head, by their fruits. Their harvest is always death, fed by the poison of their murderous hate.

A bumper crop looms. The world is perfectly configured for an orgy of hate. Developed nations’ governments have debt and other promises that cannot be kept, and their creditors and populations expect to be paid. Their economies are faltering under the load of existing debt service. The optimistic wave of social mood and central bank machinations propelling US and European equity and bond markets to new highs—and keeping their economies treading water—are long in the tooth. When markets and economies crash, scapegoats will be found, blamed, perhaps afforded something resembling judicial process, and imprisoned or worse.

China and Russia are leading a consortium of nations that recognize US unipolar world dominance is a thing of the past and are challenging what remains of it. The US public sustains itself on a delusional mix of something for nothing, red versus blue, transparently fraudulent propaganda, jingoism, and state-sponsored veneration of the state and its functionaries. And they hate, against those the government and its media instruct them to hate.

Let the hate flow through you!
Emperor Palpatine to Luke Skywalker,
Star Wars: Episode VI-Return of the Jedi

Reality will wipe out the delusions, but leave vast reservoirs of hate. The Palpatines who think they can use hate for their own ends will find that it cannot be so precisely channeled. All of its irrationally random consequences cannot be predicted, but hate will surely boomerang against its promoters.

Those of us who hope to pick up the pieces and build something better cannot afford the foolish and counterproductive indulgence of hate, during the cataclysm or its aftermath. You may be disgusted by a cockroach infestation, but hating them does nothing to eliminate them. Eradicating our cockroaches—those who claim superiority and their right to rule us—will require all the tightly focused concentration, resourcefulness, cooperation, and rationality we can summon. Justice will not be denied—but bloodthirsty vengeance and mindless violence must be. Criminality has to be called to account and suitable punishment administered. Unfortunately, revolutions often replace bad with worse. Give in to hate, and we become that which we seek to eradicate. The Dark Side destroys all who embrace it.

“I love how you have told this marvelous story with fantastic

characters and embodied all your principles and ideals within.”

Reader Comment

TGP_photo 2 FB

AMAZON

KINDLE

NOOK