H.J.A. Hoflands column van 12 maart 2015 in De Groene Amsterdammer onder de tendentieuze kop 'De Iraanse bom' is een schoolvoorbeeld van propaganda, zoals dit fenomeen werd geformuleerd door de Franse socioloog Jacques Ellul in zijn beroemde werk Propaganda. The Formation of Men's Attitudes (1965). Om dat duidelijk te maken citeer ik enkele fragmenten uit dit standaardwerk. Na eerst te hebben gesteld dat 'propaganda ceases where simple dialogue begins,' en dat daarom 'The force of propaganda is a direct attack against man,' schreef hij
The strength of propaganda reveals, of course, one of the most dangerous flaws of democracy. But that has nothing to do with my own opinions. As I am in favor of democracy, I can only regret that propaganda renders the true exercise of it almost impossible. But I think it would be even worse to entertain any illusions about a co-existence of true democracy and propaganda. Nothing is worse in times of danger than to live in a dream world. To warn a political system of the menace hanging over it does not imply an attack against it, but is the greatest service one can render a system.
Ellul benadrukt dat
In reality propaganda cannot exist without using the mass media. If, by chance, propaganda is addressed to an organized group, it can have practically no effect on individuals before that group has been fragmented.
Met als gevolg dat
Propaganda must be total. The propagandist must utilize all of the technical means at his disposal – the press, radio, TV, movies, posters, meetings… Propaganda tries to surround man by all possible routes, in the realm of feelings as well as ideas, by playing on his will or on his needs, through his conscious and his unconscious, assailing him in both his private and his public life. It furnishes him with a complete system for explaining the world, and provides immediate incentives to action. We are here in the presence of an organized myth that tries to take hold of the entire person.
Through the myth it creates, propaganda imposes a complete range of intuitive knowledge, susceptible of only one interpretation, unique and one-sided, and precluding any divergence. This myth becomes so powerful that it invades every area of consciousness, leaving no faculty or motivation intact. It stimulates in the individual a feeling of exclusiveness, and produces a biased attitude. The myth has such motive force that, once accepted, it controls the whole of the individual, who becomes immune to any other influence. This explains the totalitarian attitude that the individual adopts – wherever a myth has been successfully created – and simply reflects the totalitarian action of propaganda on him.
Not only does propaganda seek to invade the whole man, to lead him to adopt a mystical attitude and reach him through all possible psychological channels, but, more, it speaks to all men. Propaganda cannot be satisfied with partial successes, for it does not tolerate discussion; by its very nature, it excludes contradiction and discussion. As long as a noticeable or expressed tension or a conflict of action remains, propaganda cannot be said to have accomplished its aim. It must produce quasi-unanimity, and the opposing faction must become negligible, or in any case cease to be vocal.
aldus Ellul, wiens werk in het Engels werd vertaald op voorspraak van Aldous Huxley, de auteur van onder andere Brave New World (1932). Ellul's beschrijving is uiterst bruikbaar om te ontdekken wat Hofland doet, wanneer hij bijvoorbeeld in strijd met de feiten in De Groene beweert dat 'Sinds jaren Iran aan zijn eigen kernwapen [werkt],' om daarmee te waarschuwen voor 'De Iraanse bom,' die niet bestaat en ook niet wordt ontwikkeld, aldus 16 Amerikaanse inlichtingendiensten. Met deze leugen bespeelt de 'beste journalist van de twintigste eeuw' de angsten en ressentimenten van zijn kleinburgerlijk publiek. En dat lukt hem aardig. Zolang een fabel onweersproken blijft en maar vaak genoeg wordt herhaald,
This myth becomes so powerful that it invades every area of consciousness, leaving no faculty or motivation intact,' en 'produces a biased attitude. The myth has such motive force that, once accepted, it controls the whole of the individual, who becomes immune to any other influence.
Om zijn leugenachtige 'myth' geloofwaardig te maken voegt Hofland er onmiddellijk aan toe dat in 'de internationale gemeenschap' tegen de ontwikkeling van een Iraans 'kernwapen' in 'toenemende mate verzet [is] ontstaan.' Ook dit is een in feite leugen, want zijn bewering suggereert dat 'de internationale gemeenschap' ook daadwerkelijk bewijzen bezit dat Iran 'sinds jaren aan zijn eigen kernwapen [werkt],' hetgeen, nogmaals, geenszins het geval is. Het feit dat deze leugen ook nog eens door de hele redactie van het voorheen kritische tijdschrift De Groene wordt geslikt, geeft Hoflands leugen nog eens extra geloofwaardigheid, en zo begint de onweersproken waanzin zijn eigen leven te leiden, en krijgt de leugen haar volle propagandistische impact. Immers, 'As long as a noticeable or expressed tension or a conflict of action remains, propaganda cannot be said to have accomplished its aim,' terwijl
Propaganda cannot be satisfied with partial successes, for it does not tolerate discussion; by its very nature, it excludes contradiction and discussion.
De propagandistische leugen wil van nature 'tegenstelling en discussie' uitsluiten. Daarbij geldt voor de propagandist dat men:
leugens niet moet onthullen, omdat men niet weet of en wanneer men ze weer nodig heeft,
aldus de nazi-minister van Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels. Het is ook niet vreemd dat in een verslag, tijdens de oorlog opgesteld door de Office of Strategic Services, van Hitlers psychologisch profiel het volgende werd vermeld dat:
de mensen een grote leugen sneller [geloven] dan een kleine, en als je die vaak genoeg herhaalt, zullen mensen die vroeg of laat geloven.
En juist dit laatste doet Henk Hofland als hij de 'grote leugen' verspreidt dat Iran 'sinds jaren aan zijn eigen kernwapen [werkt],' om zodoende een terreur-aanval van Israel alvast te rechtvaardigen, want, zoals de fantast in De Groene beweert: 'Wat Israel zal doen hangt ook van Iran af.' Hoe irrationeel zijn betoog is blijkt uit de verhulde contradicties. Zo schrijft hij dat 'Het Israel van Netanyahu een uiterst militante staat' is, met andere woorden: een 'uiterst agressieve, fanatieke, oorlogszuchtige, strijdlustige staat.' Aansluitend verzint Hofland een opmerkelijke constructie. Na eerst te hebben beweerd dat:
Zoals de zaken er nu voorstaan moeten we (we! svh) er rekening mee blijven houden dat Iran misschien binnen een paar jaar een proefexplosie laat zien. En wat dan? Misschien een nieuwe escalatie tussen Israel en Iran, met het gebruik van de kernbom als uiterste dreiging. Dat zou de catastrofe in het Midden- Oosten vrijwel zeker voltooien,
stelt hij:
Want zou Iran de kans krijgen Israel met een atoombom aan te vallen, dan zou het Israelische antwoord vernietigend zijn.
Welke logica gaat achter de woorden van de opiniemaker schuil? Ik kan er maar één bedenken: zodra Iran 'de kans' krijgt om 'Israel met een atoombom aan te vallen' de Iraanse politiek verantwoordelijken dit ook zullen doen. Terwijl toch Iran de afgelopen twee eeuwen geen enkel land heeft aangevallen en Israel, die volgens Hofland 'uiterst agressieve, fanatieke, oorlogszuchtige, strijdlustige staat' in slechts een halve eeuw van haar bestaan zeven staten heeft aangevallen. Bovendien beschikt de 'Joodse staat' over tenminste 200 nucleaire bommen en wordt het ook nog eens militair gesteund door de VS en Europa. Daarnaast oefent de Israelische marine in NAVO-verband met onderzeeboten, uitgerust met kernwapens, voor de kust van Iran. Kortom, aan Hoflands voorstelling van zaken ontbreekt elke logica. Hier gaat het ook niet om de lezer te overtuigen via een rationeel betoog, maar om hem te mobiliseren met irrationele angsten. Wat dat betreft doet H.J.A. precies hetzelfde als elke andere propagandist, of die nu een fascist is of een zogeheten democraat. De Groene levert het platform voor deze gevaarlijke hetze, en werkt zo vrijwillig mee aan het creëren van een mythe waardoor Hoflands
propaganda imposes a complete range of intuitive knowledge, susceptible of only one interpretation, unique and one-sided, and precluding any divergence. This myth becomes so powerful that it invades every area of consciousness, leaving no faculty or motivation intact.
De aldus geschapen, officieel gesanctioneerde, versie van de werkelijkheid moet overal in de mainstream-media en zo vaak mogelijk worden herhaald om geldigheid te verwerven onder een zo groot mogelijke massa. Jacques Ellul:
Propaganda must be continuous and lasting – continuous in that it must not leave any gaps, but must fill the citizen’s whole day and all his days; lasting in that it must function over a very long period of time. Propaganda tends to make the individual live in a separate world; he must not have outside points of reference. He must not be allowed a moment of meditation or reflection in which to see himself vis-à-vis the propagandist, as happens when the propaganda is not continuous. At that moment the individual emerges from the grip of propaganda. Instead, successful propaganda will occupy every moment of the individual’s life… The individual must not be allowed to recover, to collect himself, to remain untouched by propaganda during any relatively long period, for propaganda is… based on slow, constant impregnation. It creates convictions and compliance through imperceptible influences that are effective only by continuous repetition.
Terecht schreef hij over ‘the formation of men’s attitudes’ dat propaganda
must create a complete environment for the individual, one from which he never emerges. And to prevent him from finding external points of reference, it protects him by censoring everything that might come in from the outside.
De werkwijze van een mainstream spreekbuis van de macht als Henk Hofland is al vele decennia bekend. In zijn boek Propaganda uit 1928 stelde de grondlegger van de Public Relations industrie, Edward Bernays, dat
The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.
Bernays is overigens niet één of andere malloot, maar een adviseur van talloze Amerikaanse presidenten en van de elite in Washington en op Wall Street, die in zijn standaardwerk stelde dat
If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, is it not possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing about it? The recent practice of propaganda has proved that it is possible…
Als ideoloog adviseerde hij de rijken zich te concentreren op het
this scientific technique of opinion-molding the 'engineering of consent,'
en het
regimenting the public mind every bit as much as an army regiments the bodies of its soldiers.
Bernays besefte als één van de eersten dat
propaganda is needed especially for the technological society to flourish, and its technological means – mass media among them – in turn make such integration propaganda possible,'
zoals Konrad Kellen het formuleerde in een introductie van het ook in het Engels verschenen boek van Ellul Propaganda. The Formation of Men’s Attitudes. Kellen zelf wist waarover hij het over had aangezien deze prominente geleerde in 1933 als joodse Duitser naar de VS uitweek en tijdens de Tweede Wereldoorlog deel uitmaakte van een ‘U.S. Army intelligence unit in Europe, working in psychological warfare, and being awarded the Legion of Merit.’
Vanuit propagandistisch oogpunt is duidelijk wat Hofland doet, hij probeert een sfeer van angst te scheppen om op die manier de logica uit te schakelen, zodat lezers zich bijvoorbeeld niet afvragen: waarom zou de elite van een land, 'het grootste wereldrijk uit de oudheid,' dat al een hoge beschaving kende toen de voorouders van Henk Hofland nog eeuwenlang door de moerasdelta moesten scharrelen op zoek naar iets te eten, bereid zijn om collectief zelfmoord te plegen? En waarom zou De Groene Amsterdammer de ruimte geven om Hoflands, in de polder zo besmettelijke, waanzin te verspreiden? De volgende keer meer over de pedante praatjesmakers van de 'politiek-literaire elite' achter de dijken.
Washington’s War on Russia
By Mike Whitney
“In order to survive and preserve its leading role on the international stage, the US desperately needs to plunge Eurasia into chaos, (and) to cut economic ties between Europe and Asia-Pacific Region … Russia is the only (country) within this potential zone of instability that is capable of resistance. It is the only state that is ready to confront the Americans. Undermining Russia’s political will for resistance… is a vitally important task for America.”-Nikolai Starikov, Western Financial System Is Driving It to War, Russia Insider
“Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power.”-The Wolfowitz Doctrine, the original version of the Defense Planning Guidance, authored by Under Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, leaked to the New York Times on March 7, 1992
March 18, 2015 "ICH" - "Counterpunch" - The United States does not want a war with Russia, it simply feels that it has no choice. If the State Department hadn’t initiated a coup in Ukraine to topple the elected president, Viktor Yanukovych, then the US could not have inserted itself between Russia and the EU, thus, disrupting vital trade routes which were strengthening nations on both continents. The economic integration of Asia and Europe–including plans for high-speed rail from China (“The New Silk Road”) to the EU–poses a clear and present danger for the US whose share of global GDP continues to shrink and whose significance in the world economy continues to decline. For the United States to ignore this new rival (EU-Russia) would be the equivalent of throwing in the towel and accepting a future in which the US would face a gradual but persistent erosion of its power and influence in world affairs. No one in Washington is prepared to let that happen, which is why the US launched its proxy-war in Ukraine.
The US wants to separate the continents, “prevent the emergence of a new rival”, install a tollbooth between Europe and Asia, and establish itself as the guarantor of regional security. To that end, the US is rebuilding the Iron Curtain along a thousand mile stretch from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea. Tanks, armored vehicles and artillery are being sent to the region to reinforce a buffer zone around Europe in order to isolate Russia and to create a staging ground for future US aggression. Reports of heavy equipment and weapons deployment appear in the media on nearly a daily basis although the news is typically omitted in the US press. A quick review of some of the recent headlines will help readers to grasp the scale of the conflict that is cropping up below the radar:
“US, Bulgaria to hold Balkans military drills”, “NATO Begins Exercises In Black Sea”, “Army to send even more troops, tanks to Europe”, “Poland requests greater US military presence”, “U.S. Army sending armored convoy 1,100 miles through Europe”, “Over 120 US tanks, armored vehicles arrive in Latvia”, “US, Poland to Conduct Missile Exercise in March – Pentagon”
Get the picture? There’s a war going on, a war between the United States and Russia.
Notice how most of the headlines emphasize US involvement, not NATO. In other words, the provocations against Russia originate from Washington not Europe. This is an important point. The EU has supported US-led economic sanctions, but it’s not nearly as supportive of the military build up along the perimeter. That’s Washington’s idea and the cost is borne by the US alone. Naturally, moving tanks, armored vehicles and artillery around the world is an expensive project, but the US is more than willing to make the sacrifice if it helps to achieve its objectives.
And what are Washington’s objectives?
Interestingly, even political analysts on the far right seem to agree about that point. For example, check out this quote from STRATFOR CEO George Friedman who summed it up in a recent presentation he delivered at The Chicago Council on Foreign Affairs. He said:
“The primordial interest of the United States, over which for centuries we have fought wars–the First, the Second and Cold Wars–has been the relationship between Germany and Russia, because united there, they’re the only force that could threaten us. And to make sure that that doesn’t happen.” … George Friedman at The Chicago Council on Foreign Affairs, Time 1:40 to 1:57)
Bingo. Ukraine has nothing to do with sovereignty, democracy or (alleged) Russian aggression. That’s all propaganda. It’s about power. It’s about imperial expansion. It’s about spheres of influence. It’s about staving off irreversible economic decline. It’s all part of the smash-mouth, scorched earth, take-no-prisoners geopolitical world in which we live, not the fake Disneyworld created by the western media. The US State Department and CIA toppled the elected-government in Ukraine and ordered the new junta regime to launch a desperate war of annihilation against its own people in the East, because, well, because they felt they had no other option. Had Putin’s ambitious plan to create a free trade zone between Lisbon to Vladivostok gone forward, then where would that leave the United States? Out in the cold, that’s where. The US would become an isolated island of dwindling significance whose massive account deficits and ballooning national debt would pave the way for years of brutal restructuring, declining standards of living, runaway inflation and burgeoning social unrest. Does anyone really believe that Washington would let that to happen when it has a “brand-spanking” trillion dollar war machine at its disposal?
Heck, no. Besides, Washington believes it has a historic right to rule the world, which is what one would expect when the sense of entitlement and hubris reach their terminal phase. Now check out this clip from an article by economist Jack Rasmus at CounterPunch:
“Behind the sanctions is the USA objective of driving Russia out of the European economy. Europe was becoming too integrated and dependent on Russia. Not only its gas and raw materials, but trade relations and money capital flows were deepening on many fronts between Russia and Europe in general prior to the Ukraine crisis that has provided the cover for the introduction of the sanctions. Russia’s growing economic integration with Europe threatened the long term economic interests of US capitalists. Strategically, the US precipitated coup in the Ukraine can be viewed, therefore as a means by which to provoke Russian military intervention, i.e. a necessary event in order to deepen and expand economic sanctions that would ultimately sever the growing economic ties between Europe and Russia long term. That severance in turn would not only ensure US economic interests remain dominant in Europe, but would also open up new opportunities for profit making for US interests in Europe and Ukraine as well…When the rules of the competition game between capitalists break down altogether, the result is war—i.e. the ultimate form of inter-capitalist competition.” (The Global Currency Wars, Jack Rasmus, CounterPunch)
See? Analysts on the right and left agree. Ukraine has nothing to do with sovereignty, democracy or Russian aggression. It’s plain-old cutthroat geopolitics, where the last man left standing, wins.
The United States cannot allow Russia reap the benefits of its own vast resources. Oh, no. It has to be chastised, it has to be bullied, it has to be sanctioned, isolated, threatened and intimidated. That’s how the system really works. The free market stuff is just horsecrap for the sheeple.
Russia is going to have to deal with chaotic, fratricidal wars on its borders and color-coded regime change turbulence in its capital. It will have to withstand reprisals from its trading partners, attacks on its currency and plots to eviscerate its (oil) revenues. The US will do everything in its power to poison the well, to demonize Putin, to turn Brussels against Moscow, and to sabotage the Russian economy.
Divide and conquer, that’s the ticket. Keep them at each others throats at all times. Sunni vs Shia, one ethnic Ukrainian vs the other, Russians vs Europeans. That’s Washington’s plan, and it’s a plan that never fails.
US powerbrokers are convinced that America’s economic slide can only be arrested by staking a claim in Central Asia, dismembering Russia, encircling China, and quashing all plans for an economically-integrated EU-Asia. Washington is determined to prevail in this existential conflict, to assert its hegemonic control over the two continents, and to preserve its position as the world’s only superpower.
Only Russia can stop the United States and we believe it will.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article41274.htm
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten