Propaganda vs. the People -- Are the People losing?

[kentuck]

With George W Bush in the White House, we have to say that propaganda has won. Perhaps we need to look at the political realities from a different perspective. If propaganda is winning, it is because propaganda's message is better than our own.

So we should ask ourselves: Are we following the right strategy to getting the "people" back on our side? Why do people vote against their own interests and for the interests of the propagandists? Obviously, our message is lacking.

Should we be reaching out to these "people" or should we continue to vilify and blame them for our present predicament? And how do we reach out to moderate Republicans? Are those the "people" that we need on our side? Do we need to change the way we talk to and about these folks? Is it possible to get them on our side?

Just a thought this morning. Perhaps I need more coffee?? :)

[tavalon]

1. Actually, it isn't necessarily our message

I have a bumpersticker that sums up my point of view on that very thing:

The liberal media is only as liberal as their conservative corporate owners allow them to be

In other words, our problem is a cash problem, not a message problem. Roger Ailes has lots of cash and he gets to put out a lot of his message.

I'm not saying our message couldn't be tightened up. Democrats tend to do nuance too much which works if you have an inquiring thoughtful mind to work with. Not so good for the average Joe.

[kentuck]

3. I disagree...

All the money in the world will not correct the problem, until people believe what you are saying.

[rainy]

2. If you look at history propaganda has mostly won and the

people have mostly lost. We win a few battles here and there but the monied and powerful usually win. Read Howard Zinn's: A People's History of the United States. It tells the people's stories, how they fought and won some and lost many.

[Protagoras]

12. "If you look at history"

-History is Propaganda-

is Zinn's thesis I believe...and I agree.

Propaganda always wins historically...it's in the day that it sometimes fails. It usually wins...but not always. Especially when the propaganda creates a brittle, insular attitude that is easily shattered by loud, alternative versions of truth from the outside. America is finding itself in this position. We're like the USSR of the 1960/1970 or Germany during the 1930s...we're the only ones buying our TRUTH while the rest of the world either chuckles or cringes at how wacky we sound.

Lets hope that the London Times keeps shouting very loud and that other voices keep adding to the din until it penetrates and we at least get a reprieve.

[Village Idiot]

4. And now, for a humourous (but related) interlude:

During a propaganda tour, President Bush visits a school to explain his politics to kids. He invites the kids to ask him questions. Bobby stands up and tells him "Mr. President, I got 3 questions":

1. How come, that although the count of votes was not in your favor, you still won the election?
2. Why do you want to attack Iraq without an imminent reason?
3. Don't you also consider the bombing of Hiroshima the biggest terrorist attack of all times?

Before the president can answer, the recess bell rings, and the kids leave the room. After they came back, Bush invited them again to ask questions. Joey stands up and tells him "Mr. President, I got 5 questions":

1. How come, that although the count of votes was not in your favor, you still won the election?
2. Why do you want to attack Iraq without an imminent reason?
3. Don't you also consider the bombing of Hiroshima the biggest terrorist
attack of all times?
4. Why did the recess bell ring 20 minutes early?
5. Where's Bobby?

[KoKo]

5. I have two republican friends. One who owns a business who says things

are great for her business because of Bush. She owns her own small clothing store...one of the last independent clothing stores, which she runs with her sister and no other employees. She listens to Faux at night and if she has the radio on in her shop (between customers) she listens to whatever right wing person is on. She has told me she thinks I'm crazy for being a Democrat because they are bad for business. She has two sons of draft age but supports the Invasion of Iraq because Saddam had WMD. Her parents escaped Turkey before WWII and came to this country and started a business. She doesn't like immigrants and believes that the borders should be closed to any new immigration. (She doesn't see the hypocracy) She is Greek Orthodox but only goes to church on the big holidays. She's not what I would call a religious person.

I have another friend who is a Republican and says Democrats are Socialists who want to pay for people who don't work and are not strong on defense. She has a son who's a lawyer and was ROTC and now is in the Reserves. Her son has not been called to Iraq and she isn't concerned about what's going on there, because we were attacked on 9/11 and she believes that Saddam had WMD. Her son has cleverly managed to stay out Iraq, maybe because he's a lawyer even though he speaks three languages including Chinese. She is a staunch Catholic but does believe abortions should be rare but acceptable in cases of rape or incest. She has never understood why I'm a Democrat and thinks Clinton and liberals have ruined the country.

Both of them are Moderate Repuglicans. Both are college educated, one has her masters and both grew up in Blue States in the Northeast. I've been friends with them for many years. There is nothing that would convince them that Democrats can do anything right. Both are independent financially and feel that they got theirs and those who don't have anything should have worked harder. :shrug:

How would you suggest we approach people like this? They could see people dying in the street from poverty but think "someone else should take care of them." They ignore what doesn't affect them directly. They are kind and loving parents, so are their husbands and if one doesn't get into politics they are charming and fun to be around. However since Selection 2000 I've not been able to be as close to them as I was before. And, I moved South for job change, so the distance has made it easier not to get into arguments with them over politics. But I find their views so offensive to me now that it's difficult to view them with tolerance. I've become more intolerant of their views than they are of mine.

I only give this long reply because I feel that the way the country is now...in armed camps that it's impossible to really reach many Moderate Republicans. They have to see the country implode on their own, or lose their jobs and houses before they would see that something is very wrong. And, even then they would blame it on Clinton and Carter. That's why I'm against the Democratic Party moving to the Right. We will never attract people like my friends because they have enough money and aren't in danger of losing it. We might have a better chance with the Fundies coming to our side than the typical Reagan/Nixon/Bush Republican who is "Moderate."

[kentuck]

6. Interesting comment...

"We might have a better chance with the Fundies coming to our side than the typical Reagan/Nixon/Bush Republican who is "Moderate."

Why do you think so?

[KoKo]

9. Because many of the Evangelical Christians do have some sense of

Religion, even if their reading of the Bible and Jesus's teachings is different from mainstream Protestants. Also many live in Rural areas where their only diversions are current TV (the vast cultural wasteland) where Faux tells them who is against Jesus and them, and their Church where they socialize. The jobs in rural areas don't pay as well, and for many living close to poverty it is what they are used to. They were easy to convince that Clinton was a liar and Liberals are ruining their children. But, the TV Culture of Sex and Violence which has exploded under Bush & Company is starting to get them upset.
(I posted an article on DU where Brent Bozell's RW Family Group is allying themselves with the Democrats against more Media Deregulation and Rupert Murdoch's empire, but it sank off to archives). The wealthy Evangelicals I've observed are closer to my friends in New Jersey, in that they may be be professionals or employed by the Vast Right Wing Religious machine who funds their activities and it's in their interest to keep the RW Evangelical poor supporting the Corporations and Bush.

The poorer of the two Conservative Evangelicals groups might be the ones who will see the "Lies" of Bush & Company sooner because they've lost their jobs in the funiture building, textile business and maybe are starting to notice the McMansion Culture, the hate spewing from their own pulpits (i.e. the NC Church who through out it's Democratic members) the appearance of Cross Burnings, their kids going off to a War without end and the growing discrepancies in what they are told to believe and what they see with their own eyes or experience monetarily, the TV culture of Reality Shows and violence that they thought was due to Clinton and Liberals, but now see has only grown under Bush & Co. This could awaken them to "hypocracy." Up until now they've lacked seeing that Jesus wasn't a Corporatist and advocated Peace not War.

That's what gives me hope for the RW Evangelicals. Not all of them really believe in the Rapture, I think. But it sounds good to them and like all groups peer pressure and someone poweful telling them that the "Rapture" is coming and war against the infidels is good wears thin when you start to see the pain that getting to the Rapture is going to inflict on their daily lives.

If a small group of those folks wake up and smell the coffee then the Repugs will have their biggest problem. Which is probably why Bushies keep feeding them more and more hate to keep them supporting him. Because they see the cracks coming.

Of course, this is just my wishful thinking, here, that enough RW Evangelicals will wake up and sing "Onward Christian Soldiers" right into the White House to get these folks out. :D

[KoKo]

13. Here's link: Fighting Indecency one Blip at a Time (Repug Family Values)

Brent Bozell admits Murdoch Ownership bad for America/Repugs Failed FV's
Edited on Wed Jun-01-05 05:40 PM by KoKo01


I heard Amy Gross interview "self declared Democrat," Tim Winter, the Executive Director of Bozell's Parents Television Council on her NPR Show "Fresh Air" this afternoon. Tim Winter is working with Bozell (that RW Pig) to try to regulate Cable by allowing viewers to select the channels they want to watch from the Cable Companies rather than having to take the "tiered packages" we are forced to, today.

It was a great interview. Gross asked Winter all the right questions about wouldn't regulating Cable mean that gays, christian preachers and other groups be left out if the cables were regulated like the networks.

Here's an article from Washington Post which is excellent in showing that Republican Family Values is such TOTAL CRAP that even the RW'ers are unhappy with their own sucess!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
FIGHTING INDECENCY...One Blip at a Time..

He's never met Murdoch, Bozell says. "But those who know him have told me that he makes no bones about it" -- meaning why he backs "Nip/Tuck" and other shows the PTC finds offensive. "He does it to make money."

Um -- this is bad?

The question is problematic for a man whose responsibilities include overseeing the MRC's Free Market Project. The FMP, which seeks to defend the free enterprise system from alleged liberal slurs, "has nothing to do with the Parents Television Council," Bozell says -- though for him, there's clearly some cognitive dissonance involved.

But the dissonance isn't just within Bozell's modest empire. It's within the conservative movement as a whole."It's interesting to see the conservatives split," says Tim Winter, the PTC executive director, by which he means "social conservatism versus business and corporate conservatism."

-Snip-

Sure, the PTC recently struck out in its efforts to replace basic cable with an "a la carte" programming option. Under this plan, consumers would be able to choose only the cable fare they wanted and thus could exclude raunch-heavy channels like MTV and FX. Last month the FCC came out strongly against the idea, though some in Congress still favor it.

Score one for Viacom and News Corp.

But the PTC also joined what Bozell calls a mostly liberal-driven protest that derailed -- at least temporarily -- last year's FCC attempt to relax major media ownership rules. The proposed changes would have benefited big industry players like Murdoch, allowing them to expand the number of outlets they controlled in individual markets -- lessening the chance of community standards triumphing, in Bozell's view.

As for the politics of sleaze control: Bozell thinks the issue is still up for grabs.

ON EDIT:But, he says in the article he thinks Hillary can do it! Brent Bozell for Hillary?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A49907-20...

[KoKo]

17. kick.........

[driver8]

7. Propoganda has definitely won . How else could a moron like

the shrubster become pResident? (and remain pResident)? He has some of the best shit slingers working for him; combine that with a press that is afraid to speak the truth and propoganda is kicking ass.

[kentuck]

8. Is it really the press or is it the opposition Party's lack of....

an effective response to the propagandists? I tend to think if we have a strong, or stronger response, it would get the press it would deserve. If you say nothing, nothing will get reported.

[Doctor_J]

10. Does a bear shit in the woods?

Smirk's "win" in the election(s) is nothing compared to the fact that he still has a 46% approval rating. His reign has been an unmitigated disaster. Even allowing for the fact that he can't be impeached by a Congress that is completely under Rove's thumb, his ratings should be down near his blood alcohol level.

Christ, I can't even believe that someone is still asking the question "are the people losing?"

[depakid]

11. The people already lost

There's not much to do about it- the only way now anything will change in this rigged game is for really bad things to start happening to ordinary people in droves.

The sheep have already shown they can a lot of abuse with questioning- they'll have to take a lot more personally before they'll come to their senses.

[seabeyond]

14. i told you three times. i will probably say it another three times

so it gets in your head. you see, you have to say it over and over for it to catapult into your head, the propaganda.

not a perfect. point being. the little video of bush talking about using propaganda on people is perfect. takes all of 10 sec for him to say. should be put in a commercial, and the end, a continual repeat of propaganda. propaganda.

would be a good ad.

[tabasco]

15. There was a thread the other day calling out freepers.

One of the freepers responded and stated that he thought there was a connection between Iraq and 9-11. Clearly, propaganda is winning.

It has everything to do with money. The rich own the media and have all day to spread their lies. TV has become the source of most people's information, because the American people, like their President, do not read very much anymore.

I think the Democrats need to get better at putting info in sound bites that fit into a short tv report.

I also think the Democrats need to become more populist. When the repubs squeal "class warfare!" - tell them fuckinay right it's class warfare ! IMO, the rich are trying to get a free ride out of capitalism and destroy our democracy.

I am pretty pessimistic that anything will change for the better until it gets much worse. There are just too many easily-manuipulated people in this country. Some of their followers will die before they accept the truth that the republican party is utterly corrupt.

[ElectroPrincess]

16. What I want to know ...

is ---> WHY is every single "white girl" suspected local abduction immediately elevated to a national news media feeding frenzy?

Where is the coverage of the Afghan and Iraqi war? Even if we can't allow correspondents in the field, why isn't there more coverage of the soldiers? When my brother was in Vietnam during the late 60s, it was always covered on the Evening News. Of course many times the news was propaganda consisting of inflated "Body Counts" (theirs not ours) but AT LEAST The Vietnam War was regularly covered by the USA Media.

What is going on with our Corporate News Media? They keep our eyes off of the Criminals stealing the government coffers blind (Industrial/Military Machine).

I know that a missing daughter/son is heartbreaking to everyone - and a national alert is promptly needed, but to THEN constantly focus-in on ONLY these type of stories ... or dissect sleazy sex perversion crimes of celebrities is beyond inept.

I can't even watch any of the Broadcast or Cable news stations. The Adelphia Company in our area canceled News World International, therefore, the only place for balanced news is the Internet.

What can us "little people" do to wake up the sheeple that they're being punked in a big way?