Stealth Propaganda

shagdrum

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Messages
6,568
Reaction score
44
Location
KS
Stealth Propaganda
by John Stossel

An obscure 2008 academic article gained traction with bloggers over the weekend. The article was written by the head of Obama's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Harvard Law Professor Cass Sunstein. He’s a good friend of the president and the promoter the contradictory idea: "libertarian paternalism". In the article, he muses about what government can do to combat "conspiracy" theories:
...we suggest a distinctive tactic for breaking up the hard core of extremists who supply conspiracy theories: cognitive infiltration of extremist groups, whereby government agents or their allies ... will undermine the crippled epistemology of those who subscribe to such theories. They do so by planting doubts about the theories and stylized facts that circulate within such groups, thereby introducing beneficial cognitive diversity.
That's right. Obama's Regulation Czar is so concerned about citizens thinking the wrong way that he proposed sending government agents to "infiltrate" these groups and manipulate them. This reads like an Onion article: Powerful government official proposes to combat paranoid conspiracy groups that believe the government is out to get them...by proving that they really are out to get them. Did nothing of what Sunstein was writing strike him as...I don't know...crazy? "Cognitive infiltration" of extremist groups by government agents? "Stylized facts"? Was "truthiness" too pedantic?

Salon.com's Glenn Greenwald explains why this you should be disturbed by this:
This was written 18 months ago, at a time when the ascendancy of Sunstein's close friend to the Presidency looked likely, in exactly the area he now oversees. Additionally, the government-controlled messaging that Sunstein desires has been a prominent feature of U.S. Government actions over the last decade, including in some recently revealed practices of the current administration, and the mindset in which it is grounded explains a great deal about our political class.

... What is most odious and revealing about Sunstein's worldview is his condescending, self-loving belief that "false conspiracy theories" are largely the province of fringe, ignorant Internet masses and the Muslim world.

It's certainly true that one can easily find irrational conspiracy theories in those venues, but some of the most destructive "false conspiracy theories" have emanated from the very entity Sunstein wants to endow with covert propaganda power: namely, the U.S. Government itself, along with its elite media defenders. Moreover, "crazy conspiracy theorist" has long been the favorite epithet of those same parties to discredit people trying to expose elite wrongdoing and corruption.

It is this history of government deceit and wrongdoing that renders Sunstein's desire to use covert propaganda to "undermine" anti-government speech so repugnant. The reason conspiracy theories resonate so much is precisely that people have learned -- rationally -- to distrust government actions and statements. Sunstein's proposed covert propaganda scheme is a perfect illustration of why that is. In other words, people don't trust the Government and "conspiracy theories" are so pervasive precisely because government is typically filled with people like Cass Sunstein, who think that systematic deceit and government-sponsored manipulation are justified by their own Goodness and Superior Wisdom.
 
Cass Sunstein is a dangerous man. And the power he wields right now is scary.
 
Sort of interesting timing of foxpaws' arrival at this site, isn't it?
 
Sort of interesting timing of foxpaws' arrival at this site, isn't it?
:) :) :) :)
Well I do have Goodness and Superior Wisdom... And certainly "truthiness" is far too pedantic here...
:) :) :) :)
 
I think you're looking for the word "systematic deceit"

...since the essential act of the party is to use conscious deception while retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty. To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality that one denies - all this is indispensably necessary.
- 1984, Orwell.
 
Gosh, into quotes all of a sudden shag...

nothing sums up the Bush administration better then one of my favorite 1984 quotes...
"the consequence of being at war, and in danger, makes the handing over all power to a small caste seem the natural unavoidable condition of society. Every Party member is expected to be competent, industrious, and even intelligent within narrow limits, but it is also necessary that he should be a credulous and ignorant fanatic whose prevailing moods are fear, hatred, adulation and orgiastic triumph."
 
Gosh, into quotes all of a sudden shag...

nothing sums up the Bush administration better then one of my favorite 1984 quotes...
"the consequence of being at war, and in danger, makes the handing over all power to a small caste seem the natural unavoidable condition of society. Every Party member is expected to be competent, industrious, and even intelligent within narrow limits, but it is also necessary that he should be a credulous and ignorant fanatic whose prevailing moods are fear, hatred, adulation and orgiastic triumph."

A "red herring" is a deliberate attempt to divert a process of enquiry by changing the subject.
 
BUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSH
BUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSH
BUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSH
BUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSH
BUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSHBUSH
:rolleyes:
 
A "red herring" is a deliberate attempt to divert a process of enquiry by changing the subject.

So you weren't trying to equate the 'government' of big brother to the current administration? I apologize if you weren't doing that shag. However, isn't the only reason to drag Orwell into this is to tie 1984 to the current administration? Believe me there are more quotes that tie 1984 to the previous administration than the current one.

So, why did you include the quote shag? Were you attempting to add a red herring here yourself?

Oh, have you seen the paper that is quoted at the top of this thread - you might want to look at it before the condemnation starts. It is about conspiracy theories, specifically terrorist conspiracy theories and how they can undermine the government's ability to secure the nation. Stossel/Greenwald attempt to create havoc where there isn't any. The paper appears to try to find out how to identify harmful conspiracy theories, and then, ways they can be defused before they, or the people who propagate them damage others.

You might want to at least skim it - it isn't the 1984 scenario that it is played up to be by you, Stossel and Greenwald. I don't like some of the ideas in it, but it isn't even close to Patriot Act constitutional violations.
 
Believe me there are more quotes that tie 1984 to the previous administration than the current one.

Do remember that dishonesty and cowardice always have to be paid for. Don’t imagine that for years on end you can make yourself the boot-licking propagandist of the Soviet regime, or any other regime, and then suddenly return to mental decency. Once a whore, always a whore.
-George Orwell
 
So, shag - is the above quote directed at me or the administration? Since it isn't from 1984, I would assume you have already run out of good 1984 comparable quotes towards the current administration. I could give you some if you ask nicely.

However back to real 1984 quotes that describe the Bush administration succinctly...

"There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live—did live, from habit that became instinct—in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized." - George Orwell, 1984
 
"There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live—did live, from habit that became instinct—in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized." - George Orwell, 1984
Yep, sounds like the Obama administration to me.
 
Why hasn't Obama and the supermajority he controlled simply repealed the Patriot Act then, instead of advancing further liberty stealing policies and philosophies?
 
Why hasn't Obama and the supermajority he controlled simply repealed the Patriot Act then, instead of advancing further liberty stealing policies and philosophies?

I have no idea why the Patriot Act lives on. It is disgusting (so, as you can tell foss, yes, I am against the "UNPATRIOT" Act). And it upsets me that it remains in place under the current administration. I had hoped it would have been addressed by now, but recently it was even reaffirmed by reinstating some of the provisions that should have sunseted out... blick.

And no I don't have a cite - just read the quote Foss - it is almost exactly what the Patriot Act allows the government to do.
 
Oh, and you mean verbatim... I always love the right - so anal. ;)
 
I have no idea why the Patriot Act lives on. It is disgusting (so, as you can tell foss, yes, I am against the "UNPATRIOT" Act). And it upsets me that it remains in place under the current administration. I had hoped it would have been addressed by now, but recently it was even reaffirmed by reinstating some of the provisions that should have sunseted out... blick.

You ever consider the idea that maybe it wasn't as radical as anti-bush rhetoric characterized it as?
 
I consider the opinions of many people, along with reading the actual act Shag. I know very conservative federal level judges, constitutional attorneys, men who have argued cases before the SCOTUS, attorneys who specialize in the 4th amendment, all who say exactly the same thing - it is unconstitutional and extremely bad precedent.

I to this day believe that it continues because of that terrible name... It is as far from what the true patriots had in mind for this nation as we can imagine. The ability of the government, without warrant, and at this point on speculation alone, to be able to wire tap, read, gather information about what you read, what guns you buy, what ammo you have purchased is antithesis to their core beliefs. What good is a secure nation, if you start to hand over your rights.

since you are on a quote binge lately - and certainly seem to like Franklin...

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top