I'm hoping that assumption remains operative.
I'm disappointed to see that even Martin van Creveld, whose work I admire, has fallen prey to the comforting delusion that the situation can be salvaged with ever more destructive applications of firepower:The problem in Lebanon is not Israel's "excessive" use of violence. Quite the opposite, the real problem could be Israel's extreme reluctance to use a sufficiently high level of force to solve this problem once and for all.Dr. van Creveld, more than most, should understand where that logic ends in this kind of war: defeat or genocide. For some time now, one of my biggest fears has been that the neocons and their helpmates will finally drag America into a situation in the Midlde East where those are the only choices.
The problem in Lebanon is not Israel's "excessive" use of violence. Quite the opposite, the real problem could be Israel's extreme reluctance to use a sufficiently high level of force to solve this problem once and for all.
But the fact is that we lost in Vietnam, and today, despite our vast power, we are only slogging along--if admirably--in Iraq against a hit-and-run insurgency that cannot stop us even as we seem unable to stop it. Yet no one--including, very likely, the insurgents themselves--believes that America lacks the raw power to defeat this insurgency if it wants to. So clearly it is America that determines the scale of this war. It is America, in fact, that fights so as to make a little room for an insurgency. ... This is a fact that must be integrated into our public life--absorbed as new history--so that America can once again feel the moral authority to seriously tackle its most profound problems. Then, if we decide to go to war, it can be with enough ferocity to win.
...
This is a fact that must be integrated into our public life--absorbed as new history--so that America can once again feel the moral authority to seriously tackle its most profound problems. Then, if we decide to go to war, it can be with enough ferocity to win.
Now tell me how the theory goes that democracies cannot engage in genocide? Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
And I didn't say "cannot".
They need to close down a lot more of the communications channels to successfully fool enough of the population to get away with real, large-scale genocide.
On the contrary, in the US the propoganda has been extremely effective. Many Americans still support their President even though he is just a dangerous idiot figurehead, since their innate and unwavering patriotism (susceptibility to propaganda) is manipulated by the same people who manipulate their President. For the same ends.
The lack of support outside of the US for these crimes merely goes to show how much constant exposure to propaganda is required for the recipient to become mindless.
Thank heavens some Europeans still retain some ability to think for themselves. You can't be me, I'm taken
Many Americans
Propoganda only works 100% when media channels are few, under control, and one way.
That is not the situation today and I doubt even the neocon thinkers had consulted a Futurist in the 3 decades they have been planning all this.
I am pretty sure that they predicted compliant media, not increasingly decentralized information media, such as this one, that we are in now.
Had we had compliant and centralized media today, the picture would be very grim. Even worse. Because the Americans would still be waving flags and looking forward to the next demonstration of US might and right.
So, another technological advance changes the game. Just in time. (though the seeds of the Internet were sown long ago) You can't be me, I'm taken
It's yet another attempt by the big telecoms companies to get their hands on a bigger slice of the Internet pie by state-sponsored monopoly powers. They've been at it since the Internet started growing.
On one hand, had you lived in a country with controlled media, you knew that many/most people don't trust it by default, trusting rumours more than papers or TV. On the other hand, the 'decentralised media' we have has a lot of problems: 1) it has done very little in terms of getting information -- it excels in analysis, making connections, and pushing some information in the forefront; 2) it is very fractured: Kos, Eurotrib et al are only reservates for the fact-based comunity, while other sites serve to further fanatise the faithful, turning propaganda from one dinosaur into a hundred-headed dragon surrounding the supceptible from all sides, and spewing out counter-spin to the other side1s analysis at record speed and no costs involved; 3) the Blogosphere is still a minority phenomenon, something for relatively well-off political junkies, not reached by the wide majority. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
In reality propaganda only seems to work up to a point. Even when you lock down all of the media and force them to be on-message, private thoughts and semi-private conversations guarantee that dissenting points of view will spread. In fact a state-wide campaign of violence and terror - such as the one in North Korea - will always be necessary to minimise dissent. Media control on its own can never be enough.
Bush's US is a good demonstration. Even with a solid and unified media campaign, the majority of the public aren't buying the official line.
A useful activist thing to do would be to start debunking the power of propaganda. Marketing and PR types make a living by pretending that it's more powerful than it really is. It would be naive to pretend it's not influential, but claims for its omnipotence seem to have been more than a little exaggerated.
their innate and unwavering patriotism (susceptibility to propaganda)... .... mindless. Thank heavens some Europeans still retain some ability to think for themselves.
Yes, 30-40% of Americans is indeed "many Americans". But polls indicate that 50-60% of Americans -- i.e. a lot more Americans -- disapprove of the president, and that number has been steadily climbing.
So I don't think the American population as a whole is as vulnerable to government propaganda as you believe.
I will admit, however, that I am repeatedly blown away and humbled by the extensive knowledge and sophisticated thinking of so many people on this forum, most of whom I believe are Europeans. Point n'est besoin d'espérer pour entreprendre, ni de réussir pour persévérer. - Charles le Téméraire
