by Thierry Meyssan
Propaganda is as old as human society. However,
it developed considerably during the age of mass society, and now follows
strict rules. Thierry Meyssan looks at the history and the principles of the
science of lying.
VOLTAIRE NETWORK | DAMASCUS (SYRIA) |
18 MAY 2016
The word «propaganda» refers to the Roman
organisation whose job was to propagate Catholicism over Protestantism, the
«Congregatio de Propaganda Fide».
Propaganda is a military technique which should
be distinguished from strategic subterfuge. The former seeks to trick one’s own
side, generally in order to garner support. The latter, whose antique archetype
is the Trojan horse, aims to damage the adversary. As is often the case, this
military technique has known many civil applications, in the commercial as well
as the political sector.
While at first, the monarchic and oligarchic
régimes were satisfied with making a display of their power, particularly
through ceremonials and public architecture, the democratic régimes, as soon as
they appeared, incited propaganda. Thus, the Athenian democracy favoured
Sophism, in other words, a school of thought which attempted to present any
presupposition as logical.
In the 16th century, a commercial family, the
Medicis, imagined a way of re-writing its history and inventing a patrician
origin for itself. To do so, it used «artistic patronage», soliciting the
greatest artists of their country to materialise these lies through their
works.
Later on, while religious wars were becoming
generalised in Europe, Pope Gregory XV, facing the breakthrough of
Protestantism, created a Ministry («dicastery») to defend and extend the
Catholic faith. This was the Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith
(«Congregatio de Propaganda Fide»), which is the origin of the word «
propaganda ».
In January 2015, following the assassination of
the cartoonists from Charlie-Hebdo, an administrator of Reporters Sans
Frontières, Joachim Roncin, launched the slogan «Je suis Charlie». It was
immediately adopted as a means for the individual to melt into the crowd, and
then used at the occasion of every terrorist attack (for example, «Je suis
Bruxelles» after the attacks of March 2016). Individuals who refused to adopt
the slogan were accused of deviance and «conspiracism».
Propaganda in the industrial era
The industrial era provoked a massive rural
exodus, the creation of vast urban groupings and the pooling of the working
class. While the «masses» entered politics, the French sociologist Gustave Le
Bon studied the psychology of «crowds», in other words, the infantilisation of
the individual as part of a large group. By doing so, he identified the basic
principle of modern propaganda – in order to be manipulable, the individual
must first be submerged in the crowd.
At the beginning of the First World War, in
September 1914, the British secretly created the Bureau of War Propaganda
(«Wellington House») as a branch of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs.
Re-adopting the model of the Medicis, they recruited the great writers of the
time – such as Arthur Conan Doyle, H.G. Wells or Rudyard Kipling – to publish
texts attributing imaginary crimes to the German enemy, and also painters,who
would render them in the form of images. They then also recruited the heads of
the main daily newspapers - The Times, Daily Mail, Daily Express, Daily
Chronicle – to ensure that these dailies would publicise their falsifications.
This model was then used by President Woodrow
Wilson, who created, in April 1917, the Committee on Public Information. This
organisation is famous for having employed thousands of local leaders to spread
the government gospel (the «Four Minute Men»). It developed visual propaganda
by forming a departement dedicated to the creation of posters, which produced
in particular the famous «I want you !» image. Another group also attempted to
produce films. Above all, instead of recruiting famous writers, it gathered a
group of psychologists and journalists around Edward Bernays (Sigmund Freud’s
nephew) and Walter Lippmann – the group was charged with inventing
extraordinary, terrible and edifying stories on a daily basis, which they would
then publish with the collaboration of the Press moguls. In this way, the
orientation given by Power to artists was replaced by «storytelling»,
fabricated systematically according to scientific rules.
Having directed US propaganda during the First
World War, Walter Lippmann had convinced himself that people are largely
manipulable. For him, democracy was thus impossible unless it was considered to
be a deception aimed at fabricating public consent.
While the Anglo-Saxons aimed only at striking
the imagination and making adhesion to the war a popular trend, the Germans
were experimenting with the means of forcing people to participate in the
imaginary stories they were being told. They made a wide-spread use of
uniforms, which enabled the individual to play a role, and organised grandiose
spectacles - political and sporting events – which presented the opinion of the
majority. This was without doubt the moment when «modern propaganda» was
invented - in other words, the dissemination of beliefs which could not be
criticised, and which could not be doubted. The individual who had participated
in a black uniform marching in torch-light parades could no longer question his
Nazi beliefs without questioning himself and having to rethink his past and his
vision of the future. Joseph Goebbels instituted a daily briefing at the
Ministry of Information during which he defined the «elements of language» that
the journalists were ordered to use. It was not simply a question of convincing
people, but modifying the crowds’ references. In addition, the Germans were the
first to master the new means of communication, radio and the cinema. Thus they
invited themselves into peoples’ homes by installing television.
Goebbels considered the art of propaganda as a
combat against individuality. He underlined the importance of repetition and
«brainwashing» to overcome intellectual resistance. This was even more
important in that the use of television brought the crowd to the individual.
At the end of the Second World War, the UN
General Assembly, under the insistence of the USSR and France, adopted a series
of resolutions (n° 110 [1], 381 [2] and 819 [3]) which forbade propaganda, and guaranteed the
access to contradictory information. Each member state wrote these principles
into their own national law. But in general, legal proceedings against
propaganda can only be initiated by the public Ministry, in other words, the
state, while propaganda is first of all practiced by the state. So nothing
changed.
During the Cold War, the United States and the
Soviets were rivals in matters of propaganda. Contrary to a widely-accepted
idea, the USSR made few innovations, except in matters of the re-writing of
History. By retouching official photographs, they wiped out one current of
thought or another and «disappeared» the leaders who represented them. As for
the United States, they developed radio broadcasts aimed at the Soviets (Radio
Free Europe), and others aimed at the Allies (Hollywood). At the same time,
they innovated by creating pemanent organisations and «think-tanks» – allegedly
private and scientific - charged with the a posteriori justification of public policy.
As their name indicates, the purpose of these groups is not to study and offer
propositions, as university teachers do, but to test the arguments in the
Sophist sense of the term.
More interestingly, when faced with nationalist
insurrections in the Third World, the US Army employed propaganda techniques to
intimidate the Communist rebels and maintain the neo-colonial régimes. Until
then, psychological warfare had worked to make the enemy believe that they
could not trust their leaders, and should accept defeat as inevitable. For
example, in the Philippines, General Edward Lansdale invented and staged a
mythological monster which haunted the forest and devoured human beings. In
this way, he discouraged the population from going to the help of resistants
who were hiding in the forest.
Propaganda in the satellite and digital age
Three phenomena have been combined over the
last twenty-five years - the entertainment industry, satellites, and the
arrival of digital technology.
1- The entertainment industry
Since television is a spectacle, propaganda
first of all supposes the organisation of spectacular events.
For example, in order to present the
reunification of Kuwait and Iraq as a war of aggression (1990), the US
Department of Defense employed a public-relations firm, Hill & Knowlton,
who produced the interview of an alleged nurse. She claimed that she had seen
Iraqi soldiers steal the incubators from a Kuwaiti maternity hospital, leaving
312 babies to die.
In 1999, propaganda was pushed even further -
NATO organised a gigantic event for the Press agencies to film and immediately
impose their scripted interpretation. In three days, 290,000 Albanophones
migrated to Macedonia. The resulting images made it possible to present the
repression of UÇK terrorism as a plan for the extermination of Muslims
(«Operation Horshoe»), an invention by the German Minister for Defence, Rudolf
Scharping, and thus to justify the war in Kosovo.
Even bigger - in 2001, two planes hit the Twin
Towers of the World Trade Center in New York, which then collapsed. Other
inexplicable events surround these events – a fire ravaged the offices of the
Vice-President, two explosions occurred at the Pentagon, and a third building
collapsed in New York. The incoherencies in the narration of these events was
used to disarm all questioning, while the authorities hid behind the
contradictions, which were attributable to live coverage. For several days,
television channels broadcast over and over again the images of two planes
hitting the two towers, and nothing else, until the critical capacities of
their audience were exhausted. In shock, Congress voted the permanent state of
emergency (Patriot Act) and a series of wars was then launched.
Manipulation achieves perfection when it
hammers home its message, invites spectators to accept it, then reveals that
they are being tricked and forces them to follow what they now know to be a
lie.
So, in 2003, the world watched Iraqis destroy a
statue of Saddam Hussein. President George W. Bush commented live that the
sight of a demonstrator hitting the feet of the statue with a sledge-hammer
reminded him of similar images during the fall of the Berlin Wall. The message
was that the fall of President Saddam Hussein was a liberation. We then
discovered a wider shot of the square, which was barricaded by the US Army, and
saw that the demonstrators were in reality just a small group of actors. Then
the commentators continued as if nothing had changed [4].
2- Satellites
In 1989, using new communication satellites,
the US Army transformed a local TV channel in Atlanta into the first
international «24-hour news network». The point was to use live coverage to
guarantee the veracity of the images, since there there was no time to fake
them. In reality, live coverage does not allow such images to be studied or
checked [5].
CNN passed off the attempted coup d’état by
ex-Prime Minister Zhao Ziyang in China as a popular revolt which was
murderously repressed on Tienanmen Square [6]. It glorified the «Velvet Revolution» in the
Czech Republic by pretending that the police had killed a demonstrator. It
validated the discovery of the mass grave at Timisoara, in reality corpses
which had been taken from a mortuary and presented as having been killed by the
police during demonstrations, or else as victims of torture, in order to
justify the coup d’état by Ion Iliescu against the Caucescus. Etc.
On the same principle, in 2005, the Emirate of
Qatar took over the Arabo-Israeli dialogue channel Al-Jazeera and transformed
it into a loud-speaker for the Muslim Brotherhood [7]. In 2011, it played a central rôle in the
«Arab Spring» operations. But its audience followed the same curve as the audience
of CNN – after having enjoyed a resounding success with its imaginary scoops,
it lost most of its audience when its lies were discovered.
The principle of radios destined for foreign
parts was improved by Radio Marti, which the CIA broadcast from airborne AWACS
off the coast of Cuba. In 2012, a vast project was organised to disconnect
Syrian TV channels from their satellite and replace them with fake programmes
which were to announce the fall of the régime and the flight of its leaders.
This was prepared by the use of synthetic images showing the flight of
President Bachar el-Assad [8]. But seeing the reactions of Syria and
Russia, the operation was cancelled, although a signal from an NSA base in
Australia had already replaced that of Syrian TV on ArabSat.
3- Digital
During the same period, the progress of digital
techniques, in particular the wide-spread use of computers and the Internet,
caused a resurgence of the role of individuals, but without dispersing the
crowd phenomenon.
In 2007, the CIA sent anonymous SMS messages to
the areas inhabited by the Luos in Kenya, accusing the Kikuyus of having falsified
the Presidential election. The Luos widely distributed the messages, and this
led to riots. More than a thousand people were killed, and 300,000 displaced.
Finally, the «ONG’s» offered to mediate, and then imposed Raila Odinga in
power [9].
The same year, the CIA tested the credibility
of anonymous videos filmed by portable telephones. These narrow angle sequences
do not permit the visualisation of their context, and their uncertain origin
makes it imossible to know where they were filmed. And yet the videos showing
monks setting themselves on fire, or scenes of military repression during the
«Saffron Revolution» in Myanmar were held to be authentic. They were broadcast
by television channels and were seen around the world.
The coalition of lies
Propaganda techniques have not evolved over the
last few years. But they have been reinforced by the creation of a coalition of
lies. Until now, each state managed its own campaign, but during the war
against Iraq, in 2002, coordination was set up between the Ministries for
Defense of the United States, the United Kingdom and Israël, then extended to
Qatar and Saudi Arabia. This coalition tried first of all to manipulate the UN
inspectors in Iraq into believing in the existence of weapons of mass destruction.
Then, since it failed, it set about intoxicating the international media [10].
In 2011, it was this coalition which filmed, in
an open-air studio in Qatar, the images of the arrival of the rebels on
Martyrs’ Square in Tripoli. Broadcast at first by the British channel Sky News,
they were sufficient to make the Libyans believe that the battle was over, when
in fact it was just beginning. As a result, NATO was able to take the city
without notable losses (but 40,000 dead Libyans). Saïf al-Islam Kadhafi was
obliged to go down to the Square and allow himself to be applauded by his
followers in order to contradict the images which had been falsely filmed there
the night before by Sky.
This coalition of lies got started during the
war against Syria, which was started with the participation of 120 states and
16 international organisations – the greatest coalition in History.
In October 2011, NATO set up a show village,
Jabal al-Zouia, in the North of the country. One after another, Western
journalists were taken there by the public relations service of the Turkish
Prime Minister. There they apparently witnessed the Free Syrian Army supported
by the population. However, the operation ended when a Spanish journalist
recognised the heads of this Free «Syrian» Army – the leaders of al-Qaïda in
Libya, Abdelhakim Belhaj and Mahdi al-Harati [11]. But no matter, the image told the story that
there really existed a vast army composed of defectors, ex-soldiers of the
Syrian Arab Republic.
In 2012, for the space of a month, the world
was shown Baba Amr’s revolutionaries, beseiged and bombarded by the army of the
régime [12]. In reality, although the area was indeed
beseiged, it had not been bombarded, because 72 Syrian soldiers were themselves
surrounded in a supermarket. The jihadists blew up the houses of Christians in
order to cause damage that they would blame on the Syrian Arab Republic. Tyres
were burned on the rooftops so that witnesse would see the plumes of thick
black smoke. France24 and Al-Jazeera paid «citizen journalists», as on-site
correspondants, who witnessed a Revolutionary Tribunal. The bodies of 150
martyrs, whom the Tribunal had condemned to have their throats cut in public,
were displayed on-screen as the victims of the alleged bombing [13]. On site, a celebrated Franco-Israeli-US
writer, Jonathan Littell, declared that the «revolution» was a beautiful thing.
At last there were images and a witness testimonial to the «cruelty of the
régime».
In 2013, the United Kingdom created InCoStrat,
a communications company in the service of the jihadist groups. It designed
logos, made video clips by portable telephone, and printed brochures for a
hundred of these groups, thus giving the impression of a popular uprising
against the Republic. For example, together with the SAS, it made a spectacle
of the most important group, Jaysh al-Islam (Army of Islam). Saudi Arabia
supplied the tanks which were delivered from Jordan. Uniforms were made in
Spain and distributed to the jihadists for an officer promotion ceremony. All
this was choerographed and filmed by professionals in order to give the
impression that the army was organised like regular forces and was capable of
rivaling with the Syrian Arab Army [14]. The idea was planted that this really was a
civil war, and yet the images only showed a few hundred extras, most of whom
were foreigners.
[5] « L’effet CNN », par Thierry Meyssan, Réseau
Voltaire, 19 mai 2003.
[14] « Comment le Royaume-Uni met en scène les
jihadistes », Réseau
Voltaire, 13 mai 2016.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.