Can Propaganda Be Used for Good Ends - Essay Example

Can propaganda be used for “good” ends? Propaganda refers to ideas, information or rumours which are spread deliberately in order to rally people behind a certain cause but usually involving exaggeration, lying or misrepresentation about certain issues in order to gain support for that particular issue (Marlin, 2002). Propaganda is present in all aspects of human life even though it is commonly used in military, war mongering and war. Various tactics are often employed to spread propaganda (Galula, 2006). One of the tactics used in propaganda is employment of selective stories which often have a wide coverage and are objective in nature (Heller, 2005). Another tactic that is employed to spread propaganda is the release of partial facts or historical context (Conserva & Conserva, 2009). Individuals may also reinforce reasons and motivations to act in order to safeguard his/her security. Propaganda may also be spread through demonization of the enemy who is often seen as one who does not fit the picture of what is right (Jowett & O’Donnell, 2011). A narrow range of discourse may also be employed to spread propaganda whereby there is no discussion of the framework within which the opinions are formed. The role of propaganda in democracies Democracy is governance systems where the executive and the majority legislature are elected at regular intervals by majority of citizens which are accountable to it (Jowett & O’Donnell, 2011). Democracy is defined as government by majority of people (Scott & Jackson, 2004). It is argued that conscious and intelligent manipulation of the masses’ organized habits and opinions in democratic societies (Marlin, 2002). People involved in this manipulation are the invisible government which usually runs the democratic government of the day. This constitute propaganda which governs people, moulds the minds of the governed masses, formation of tastes for the people and the ideas of masses are suggested by people they have not even heard of (Galula, 2006). Such propaganda often results in many people being governed by few people. This helps to maintain harmony among those being governed. Any anti-propaganda in democratic societies may result in unwarranted wars (Conserva & Conserva, 2009). Blatant and crude propaganda is usually employed in totalitarian regimes. However, this kind of propaganda is easily recognized. Propaganda also exists in democratic societies but is difficult to recognize it (Galula, 2006). Thus, the audience should always be aware of such elements of propaganda when watching conflict or other issues in media in spite of the reputation of the media organization (Heller, 2005). Many people in different democracies value the freedom of speech. However, propaganda distorts this freedom and is similar to violence that exists in totalitarian regimes (Marlin, 2002). In order to avoid such propaganda major public institutions ought to be held responsible. Some authors have argued that in democracies such as USA, governments cannot control its people using force but they can do so by controlling what they think by employment of propaganda (Conserva & Conserva, 2009). They further argue that those who fervently seek freedom across the globe need to understand the mechanisms and practices of indoctrination (Scott & Jackson, 2004). Such practices and mechanisms can be easily deciphered in totalitarian regimes than in democratic societies where people serve as instruments to perpetuate it either unwillingly or unwittingly (Heller, 2005). Thus, in democratic societies journalism is charged with monitoring power and the centres of power. Propaganda in democracies is believable because most people often want to believe that they and their country are the best (Conserva & Conserva, 2009). In addition, the fear mongering which make such people to feel that their cherished values such as justice and freedom are threatened also make them to believe in propaganda (Galula, 2006). Claims and fears which are presented in a logical and factual manner also contribute to people believing in such lies (Heller, 2005). Another reason why people believe in propaganda is the professional way in which media and public relations is managed (Marlin, 2002). Minimization of widely discussed thoughts which often deviate from the main agendas by management of thoughts via narrowing ranges of debate also make people to believe in propaganda (Conserva & Conserva, 2009). The role of propaganda in environmental issues The term global warming was changed to climate change (Scott & Jackson, 2004). This was a psychological change which was intended to keep abreast with growing awareness of the schemes of propaganda which surrounded the global warming hype. Scientifically, global warming is due to solar activity (Galula, 2006). It is reported that increased solar activity increases the length of earth’s warming trend (Jowett & O’Donnell, 2011). It is reported that any changes in climate that occur on earth are mainly due to high frequency active auroral research program (H.A.A.R.P) and other related programs throughout the earth in addition to chemtrail clouds (Heller, 2005). However, in order to protect the environment to degradation, many countries such as USA especially the Republicans use propaganda to relate global warming to degradation of the environment (Marlin, 2002). This indoctrinates the mind of many who then start involving themselves in activities aimed at conserving the environment and reducing carbon emission (Conserva & Conserva, 2009). Media has of late started to focus on environmental issues (Scott & Jackson, 2004). Thus, its is believed that the information that the mass media distributes in relation to how the society is related to nature could determine how the public will understand whether or not environmental degradation are profit motivated, basis for economic competition for firms or aligarchic control of natural resources on the planet. The media obtains information from diverse theories provided by environmental sociologists which have different arguments (Galula, 2006). Thus, it is upon the media to choose from these diverse ideologies in accordance to the propaganda model while ignoring other ideas (Heller, 2005). The propaganda model would allow the media to systematically portray frames which they feel legitimize the status quo of environmental degradation. The role of propaganda in human rights More often than not propaganda is used to promote discrimination. This results in disturbance of peace and always paves way to massive human rights violations including genocide (Conserva & Conserva, 2009). Hate propaganda can result in harm to the people and groups of people targeted by the propaganda (Scott & Jackson, 2004). Such propaganda is usually directed to people or groups of people based on their colour, religion, race, ethnic origin or nationality (Marlin, 2002). Hate propaganda usually degrades the targeted group, attacks their dignity and sense of self worth. The society is also hurt as a whole since hate propaganda results in destruction of social harmony and encouragement of violence and discrimination (Galula, 2006). This creates an environment which is hostile for targeted group. Such propaganda furthermore dehumanizes the individuals in the targeted group (Scott & Jackson, 2004). As a consequence of this the targeted group is stigmatized and is usually identified as the enemy of the rest of the society through creation of false illusion (Heller, 2005). On many instances, propaganda has been employed to create a climate which results in the toleration or implementation of exclusionary behaviour. In addition, propaganda has in many cases been used to trivialize the importance of crimes committed against its targets through conferring a sense of social acceptability and even the desirability upon those crimes (Galula, 2006). This is what caused the Holocaust and the Rwandan genocide. From a limited propaganda that is often directed at a certain group, this progresses to a more systematic propaganda that results in the state sponsored hate speech (Jowett & O’Donnell, 2011). This finally culminates into direct incitement hate which ultimately results in publicly supported mass crimes. Since propaganda takes long time to propagate, they are usually difficult to regulate (Conserva & Conserva, 2009). The conscience of people is usually dulled by propaganda which results in the development of a social psyche that is willing to tolerate inhumanities (Heller, 2005). The people’s normal and expected reaction is usually modified by propaganda and as a consequence they accept discriminatory behaviour instead of condemning it (Jowett & O’Donnell, 2011). Speeches are used to persuade people to the views of propagandist in order for the oppression to be acceptable to a large number of people (Marlin, 2002). A collective agreement among perpetrators of aggression is required in order to result in genocide. Shared indoctrination rather than direct incitement is needed to generate genocide (Scott & Jackson, 2004). Hate propaganda is disseminated through different kinds of media. Simple and clear descriptions and arguments are preferred over complex ones to spread propaganda ideologies (Jowett & O’Donnell, 2011). There is frequent repetition of propaganda in all forms of media with the main aim of creating a sort of emotional and intellectual numbness (Galula, 2006). This consequently results in their believability. Stereotypes are also used by propagandist in order to further the acceptability of the propaganda among the audience (Heller, 2005). In the Rwandan genocide for instance, the Tutsis were stereotyped as inherent thieves, liars and killers. This was spread in different media in Rwanda and eventually culminated in the genocide. The humanity of hate propaganda targets is usually undermined even though measures aiming at its eradication are controversial (Galula, 2006). This is because democratic societies are unwilling to enact laws which limit the freedom of expression since it is a universally recognized human right. It is assumed that freedom of speech is essential for the progress and development of every society. In spite the wide spread recognition of freedom of expression, the freedom is not often utilized for the benefit of the society (Conserva & Conserva, 2009). Harmful propaganda has for long resulted in events which are tragic such as genocide and crimes against humanity. It is however recognized that language may result in adverse social harm and that hate speech suppression is needed in order to protect the rights of others such as equality (Marlin, 2002). This is recognized by both international jurisprudence and the international human rights instruments. According to article 19 of the international covenant on civil and political rights freedom of speech may be restricted in order to respect the rights of others (Heller, 2005). The role of propaganda in women’s rights Rights refer to unalienable rights to liberty, life and pursuit of happiness (Conserva & Conserva, 2009). The main aim of formation of governments is to secure these rights for the governed. In some instances some benefits are taken from a group of people and given to others. Such benefits are referred to as entitlements (Heller, 2005). Critics of entitlements often feel they are some form of stealing while proponents call them rights (Marlin, 2002). In socialist states, entitlements are referred to as rights and often undermine people’s freedom of self determination. Privileges or rather entitlements are usually propagandized by tyrannies as rights and denigrate those denied rights as undeserving (Galula, 2006). Women rights are seen as privileges and entitlements which are enforced by states (Jowett & O’Donnell, 2011). These entitlements are bestowed upon women at the expense of men’s unalienable rights and their property. The adoption of the so called women rights has more often destroyed families, fathers and freedom (Galula, 2006). It is argued that the continued advocacy for women’s rights is an anti-man matriarchal tyranny which is concealed in feminist propaganda and distortions of the truth (Heller, 2005). Thus, the feminist proclaimed greater good excuses are aimed at superseding the unalienable rights of men. The main phrases used to propagate women’s rights propaganda are “the safety of women” and “the best interest of the child”. The role of propaganda on the war on drug War on drug is as old as institutionalized religion. Some critics argue that war on drugs is not about to cease (Heller, 2005). The reason given for this argument is that in the past few decades some individuals who are addicted to money and power have been lying and deceiving people on massive scale in order to encourage consumption of drugs (Marlin, 2002). The critics believe that drug abuse has a political solution (Heller, 2005). This argument is based on the fact that American federal government aims at attaining total control of the earth in terms of material resources and people via political, economic and military means. To attain this, the American federal government ought to spend vast amount of money for several years (Galula, 2006). The critics argue that some of this money is obtained from the US government covert ways of trafficking in illegal drugs which are basically addictive (Jowett & O’Donnell, 2011). They further argue that war on drugs persists because it is USA federal government tactic to keep street prices for drugs high and profitable irrespective of the adverse social and personal damage. The anti-drug campaigns are thus sponsored by US federal government worldwide (Heller, 2005). The critics thus argue that war on drugs will only succeed once US attains its aim of total control of the earth (Conserva & Conserva, 2009). Another alternative fronted to solve drug menace across the globe is formation of an alliance between fascist nations and sustained resistances by individuals who value their freedom in order avoid America’s intent of controlling the world. Thus prohibition of drug consumption is argued to be all about economic and military power rather than health. The perception on the consumption of illegal recreational drugs as substances which are harmful to the health and safety of people has been changing since 1970s. One of the drugs that have elicited many debates is marijuana (Marlin, 2002). Marijuana is argued among opponents of its use that it is a gateway to the abuse more dangerous narcotics such as cocaine and heroine (Jowett & O’Donnell, 2011). Much campaign has been initiated by different states to educate the public on the adverse effects of marijuana. However, proponents for consumption of marijuana have long been using propaganda via internet to counter the efforts of the different governments (Galula, 2006). The internet propaganda wielded by proponents has outsmarted the governments’ efforts to counter the usage of marijuana. The proponents of marijuana argue that marijuana is not an addictive drug that can lead to abuse of other hard drugs and that the benefits of marijuana are many in comparison to its adverse effects (Heller, 2005). They even contest that other regulated substances such as alcohol and tobacco are much harmful than marijuana. They even say that tobacco and alcohol has been documented to cause deaths as opposed to marijuana where no case has been documented. The media fraternity has been funded by governments to ensure that the masses buy the idea that marijuana is an illicit drug (Jowett & O’Donnell, 2011). As a consequence the media has been criticized for compromising their integrity as independent press (Marlin, 2002). The controversy about marijuana has been enhanced by acceptance among certain groups of in the media unlike other drugs. For instance many hip hop celebrities advocate for the smoking of marijuana (Galula, 2006). The acceptance of marijuana among youths who embrace hip hop subculture has undermined the efforts of governments to fights drugs such as marijuana. The role of propaganda in health The term evolution in health care has of late been used in many cases. The term evolution portrays spontaneity and inevitability. However, the truth is that no evolution has taken place in the health care system. Most changes being witnessed in healthcare system are neither inevitable nor spontaneous (Marlin, 2002). These changes are planned and executed by people who proceed only to the level where people are coerced or deceived into accepting these changes. The term health care is changing has also been employed to promote propaganda in healthcare. What is happening in healthcare is that it is being changed rather than changing (Heller, 2005). The healthcare is not capable of changing itself but rather it is being changed by individuals who are committed to certain political agenda (Galula, 2006). The term evolution obscures what is known: changes are caused by individuals working together. This implies that the changes can be reversed by other group of individuals working together. Another term that has been used in health to propagate propaganda is the public demands. This is often a false assertion which usually aims at introducing new restrictions on the operations of physicians (Jowett & O’Donnell, 2011). Such restrictions more often give more power to bureaucrats to be in control of what physicians are expected to do (Marlin, 2002). Thus it is power which drives these individuals who masquerades as advocates of the general public rather than the common good of the public. Another related term is accountability which often is aimed at justifying the bureaucratic intrusion in the healthcare system. Another term used to propagate propaganda is life expectancy and infant mortality. These terms are employed to promote socialized medicine (Galula, 2006). Thus countries with lower life expectancy and high infant mortality rates are seen as countries which support private healthcare system rather than social healthcare system. The role of propaganda in peace keeping United Nations (UN) peacekeeping operations have changed dramatically in the past few years. The success and failure of UN peacekeeping operations largely depend on the media (Conserva & Conserva, 2009). Recent failures or partial failure are attributed to failure of organization to understand the media, failure of UN to respond appropriately to propaganda about peacekeeping and failure of Un to propagate peacekeeping doctrine which takes into account the value of the media (Galula, 2006). Media has been known to contribute to exacerbation of conflict although it is also involved in peace building processes (Marlin, 2002). During war media is often censored and under government control. Many journalists have also been attacked during war in order to gag them from informing the public on what is on the ground (Heller, 2005). Media has on the other hand been employed as a vessel of propagating propaganda and hate speech during war (Galula, 2006). In some instances media has been utilized to call upon certain groups of people to turn against other groups of people. For instance, media was used to spread propaganda against the UN peacekeeping force in the former Yugoslavia (Galula, 2006). The credibility of UN mission has been tainted in many instances by media fraternity which often misinforms the public leaving the mission helpless and unable to carry out its mandates effectively and efficiently (Marlin, 2002). For instance, during the Bosnia war independent press organs were employed to criticize UN and other international institutions for specific purposes. The role of propaganda in law and order Law and order has not escaped propaganda. One of the main frames of law that has been much publicized is the anti-choice propaganda (Conserva & Conserva, 2009). In these debates the anti-choice believe that foetuses rights are more important than that of women’s while the pseudo-pro-choice argue that both the life of the mother and the foetus is are equally important (Heller, 2005). Conclusion From the discussion above it is apparent that propaganda is a social vice that ought to be avoided at all costs. Even though the discussion has noted some positivity in propaganda especially in democracies and environmental issues, the so called good propaganda has limited effect on the general society and people ought to embrace truth to help foster co-0existence among people from different cultural and racial backgrounds. Two things have been prominent among all forms of propaganda: power and control. The need for few individuals in different societies to control and have power of the rest of people drives them to employ both professional and amateur propagandist in order to fulfil their own individualistic interest of being powerful and controlling the rest of the population. Thus we are still pinned on the twin horns of Ellul’s dilemma since current propaganda has not changed from the past one. References Conserva, M., & Conserva, H. (2009). Propaganda: A Question and Answer Approach. London: AuthorHouse Galula, D. (2006). Counterinsurgency warfare: theory and practice. London: Greenwood Publishing Group Heller, S. (2005). The education of a graphic designer, 2nd Ed. London: Skyhorse Publishing Inc. Jowett, G., & O’Donnell, V. (2011). Propaganda & Persuasion, 5th Ed. New York: SAGE Publications Marlin, R. (2002). Propaganda and the ethics of persuasion. London: Broadview Press. Scott, L., & Jackson, P. (2004). Understanding intelligence in the twenty-first century: journeys in shadows. London: Taylor & Francis. Read More