Noam Chomsky Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
March 17, 1991
Excerpted from the Alternative Press Review,
Fall 1993
... Let me begin by counter-posing
two different
conceptions of democracy. One conception
of democracy has it that a democratic
society
is one in which the public has the
means
to participate in some meaningful way
in
the management of their own affairs
and the
means of information are open and free....
An alternative conception of democracy
is
that the public must be barred from
managing
of their own affairs and the means
of information
must be kept narrowly and rigidly controlled.
That may sound like an odd conception
of
democracy, but it's important to understand
that it is the prevailing conception....
Early History of Propaganda
...[The Wilson administration] established
a government propaganda commission,
called
the Creel Commission, which succeeded,
within
six months, in turning a pacifist population
into a hysterical, war-mongering population
which wanted to destroy everything
German,
tear the Germans limb from limb, go
to war
and save the world.
That was a major achievement, and it
led
to a further achievement. Right at
time and
after the war the same techniques were
used
to whip up a hysterical Red Scare,
as it
was called, which succeeded pretty
much in
destroying unions and eliminating such
dangerous
problems as freedom of the press and
freedom
of political thought. There was very
strong
support from the media, from the business
establishment, which in fact organized,
pushed
much of this work, and it was in general
a great success.
Among those who participated actively
and
enthusiastically were the progressive
intellectuals,
people of the John Dewey circle, who
took
great pride, as you can see from their
own
writings at the time, in having shown
that
what they called the "more intelligent
members of the community," namely
themselves,
were able to drive a reluctant population
into a war by terrifying them and eliciting
jingoist fanaticism. The means that
were
used were extensive. For example, there
was
a good deal of fabrication of atrocities
by the Huns, Belgian babies with their
arms
torn off, all sorts of awful things
that
you still read in history books. They
were
all invented by the British propaganda
ministry,
whose own committment at the time,
as they
put it in their secret deliberations,
was
"to control the thought of the
world."
But more crucially they wanted to control
the thought of the more intelligent
members
of the community in the U. S., who
would
then disseminate the propaganda that
they
were concocting and convert the pacifist
country to wartime hysteria. That worked.
It worked very well. And it taught
a lesson:
State propaganda, when supported by
the educated
classes and when no deviation is permitted
from it, can have a big effect. It
was a
lesson learned by Hitler and many others,
and it has been pursued to this day.
Spectator Democracy
... Walter Lippman, who was the dean
of American
journalists, a major foreign and domestic
policy critic and also a major theorist
of
liberal democracy... argued that what
he
called a "revolution in the art
of democracy,"
could be used to "manufacture
consent,"
that is, to bring about agreement on
the
part of the public for things that
they didn't
want by the new techniques of propaganda....
... He argued that in a properly-functioning
democracy there are classes of citizens.
There is first of all the class of
citizens
who have to take some active role in
running
general affairs. That's the specialized
class.
They are the people who analyze, execute,
make decisions, and run things in the
political,
economic, and ideological systems.
That's
a small percentage of the population...
Those
others, who are out of the small group,
the
big majority of the population, they
are
what Lippman called "the bewildered
herd." We have to protect ourselves
from the trampling and rage of the
bewildered
herd...
... So we need something to tame the
bewildered
herd, and that something is this new
revolution
in the art of democracy: the "manufacture
of consent." The media, the schools,
and popular culture have to be divided.
For
the political class and the decision
makers
have to give them some tolerable sense
of
reality, although they also have to
instill
the proper beliefs. Just remember,
there
is an unstated premise here. The unstated
premise -- and even the responsible
men have
to disguise this from themselves --
has to
do with the question of how they get
into
the position where they have the authority
to make decisions. The way they do
that,
of course, is by serving people with
real
power. The people with real power are
the
ones who own the society, which is
a pretty
narrow group. If the specialized class
can
come along and say, I can serve your
interests,
then they'll be part of the executive
group.
You've got to keep that quiet. That
means
they have to have instilled in them
the beliefs
and doctrines that will serve the interests
of private power. Unless they can master
that skill, they're not part of the
specialized
class. They have to be deeply indoctrinated
in the values and interests of private
power
and the state-corporate nexus that
represents
it. If they can get through that, then
they
can be part of the specialized class.
The
rest of the bewildered herd just have
to
be basically distracted. Turn their
attention
to something else....
... In what is nowadays called a totalitarian
state, then a military state, it's
easy.
You just hold a bludgeon over their
heads,
and if they get out of line you smash
them
over the head. But as society has become
more free and democratic, you lose
that capacity.
Therefore you have to turn to the techniques
of propaganda. The logic is clear.
Propaganda
is to democracy what the bludgeon is
to a
totalitarian state....
Public Relations
The U. S. pioneered the public relations
industry. Its committment was to "control
the public mind," as its leaders
put
it. They learned a lot from the successes
of the Creel Commission and the success
in
creating the Red Scare and its aftermath.
The public relations industry underwent
a
huge expansion at that time. It succeeded
for some time in creating almost total
subordination
of the public to business rule through
the
1920s....
Public relations is a huge industry.
They're
spending by now something on the order
of
a billion dollars a year. All along
its committment
was to controlling the public mind....
... The corporate executive and the
guy who
cleans the floor all have the same
interests.
We can all work together and work for
Americanism
in harmony, liking each other. That
was essentially
the message. A huge amount of effort
was
put into presenting it. This is, after
all,
the business community, so they control
the
media and have massive resources...
Mobilizing
community opinion in favor of vapid,
empty
concepts like Americanism. Who can
be against
that? Or, to bring it up to date, "Support
our troops." Who can be against
that?
Or yellow ribbons. Who can be against
that?...
The point of public relations slogans
like
"Support our troops" is that
they
don't mean anything. They mean as much
as
whether you support the people in Iowa.
Of
course, there was an issue. The issue
was,
Do you support our policy? But you
don't
want people to think about the issue.
That's
the whole point of good propaganda.
You want
to create a slogan that nobody's going
to
be against, and everybody's going to
be for,
because nobody knows what it means,
because
it doesn't mean anything, but its crucial
value is that it diverts your attention....
That's all very effective. It runs
right
up to today. And of course it is carefully
thought out. The people in the public
relations
industry aren't there for the fun of
it.
They're doing work. They're trying
to instill
the right values. In fact, they have
a conception
of what democracy ought to be: It ought
to
be a system in which the specialized
class
is trained to work in the service of
the
masters, the people who own the society.
The rest of the population ought to
be deprived
of any form of organization, because
organization
just causes trouble. They ought to
be sitting
alone in front of the TV and having
drilled
into their heads the message, which
says,
the only value in life is to have more
commodities
or live like that rich middle class
family
you're watching and to have nice values
like
harmony and Americanism. That's all
there
is in life. You may think in your own
head
that there's got to be something more
in
life than this, but since you're watching
the tube alone you assume, I must be
crazy,
because that's all that's going on
over there....
So that's the ideal. Great efforts
are made
in trying to achieve that ideal. Obviously,
there is a certain conception behind
it.
The conception of democracy is the
one that
I mentioned. The bewildered herd is
a problem.
We've got to prevent their rage and
trampling.
We've got to distract them. They should
be
watching the Superbowl or sitcoms or
violent
movies. Every once in a while you call
on
them to chant meaningless slogans like
"Support
our troops." You've got to keep
them
pretty scared, because unless they're
properly
scared and frightened of all kinds
of devils
that are going to destroy them from
outside
or inside or somewhere, they may start
to
think, which is very dangerous, because
they're
not competent to think. Therefore it's
important
to distract them and marginalize them.
Engineering Opinion
It is also necessary to whip up the
population
in support of foreign adventures. Usually
the population is pacifist, just like
they
were during the First World War. The
public
sees no reason to get involved in foreign
adventures, killing, and torture. So
you
have to whip them up. And to whip them
up
you have to frighten them....
To a certain extent then, that ideal
was
achieved, but never completely. There
are
institutions which it has as yet been
impossible
to destroy. The churches, for example,
still
exist. A large part of the dissident
activity
in the U. S. comes out of the churches,
for
the simple reason that they're there.
So
when you go to a European country and
give
a political talk, it may very likely
be in
the union hall. Here that won't happen,
because
unions first of all barely exist, and
if
they do exist they're not political
organizations.
But the churches do exist, and therefore
you often give a talk in a church.
Central
American solidarity work mostly grew
out
of the churches, mainly because they
exist.
The bewildered herd never gets properly
tamed,
so this is a constant battle.
|