Register to Comment
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 38
Like Tree9Likes
  1. #1
    the_Observer the_Observer is offline
    the_Observer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,825

    Is propaganda an argument against direct democracy?

    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.

    We are governed, out minds molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society." - Edward Bernays, Propaganda.
    So begins the opening paragraphs of Edward Bernays "Propaganda" first published in 1928. It is a fact, asserts Bernays, the nephew of Sigmund Feud, that we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons "who understand the mental process and social pattern of the masses". Such persons constitute an invisible government that "pull the wires which control the public mind".

    The invisible government of Bernays is not a coordinated group of shadowy figures manipulating governments for their own ends. Rather this invisible government is in open competition with themselves for our time, our attention and our money. The fitness sector for example may compete against the computer gaming sector while both groups are apathetic and mostly unaware of the cotton industry who are nevertheless competing to shape our attitudes and desires to cotton based products.

    The group mind Bernays refers to several times throughout his book is strangely mundane and yet powerful. We live in an society with a huge number of social, political, economical, racial and religious groupings all with hundreds of subdivisions each. Each of those groups have their own leaders who influence us. It is through identifying and persuading these interconnecting groups that the masses can be influenced and our desires molded.

    This invisible, intertwining structure of groupings and associations is the mechanism by which democracy has organized its group mind and simplified its mass thinking. To deplore the existence of such a mechanism is to ask for a society such as never was and never will be. To admit that it exists, but expect that it shall not be used, is unreasonable.
    Is such propaganda not an argument against direct democracy? Direct democracy is a form of democracy in which people decide on policy initiatives directly, as opposed to a representative democracy in which people vote for representatives who then decide policy initiatives.

    Modern states contain both political and economic institutions; mediating between the two is the public sphere which includes all organizations and activities capable of generating debate - TV, radio, blogs, pubs, cafes etc. The public sphere is the context in which free speech and open deliberation became a value in it's own right as individuals exercise their civil rights. A healthy public sphere is essential in any democracy, but even more so in a direct democracy: in an ideal state a government is only legitimate when it is in alignment with the majority opinion in the public sphere. But this is exactly where direct democracy becomes undone.

    In theory each person makes up their own minds in private, but in practice few of us have the time, or even the incentive, to study abstruse economies or shift through the ethical data involved in every question. So we accept shortcuts by allowing information to be filtered and organized through news channels, professors, governments, journalists etc. All mass movements have surrendered their power to mass media and the unelected experts from the bureaucratic welfare state. As Bernays argues, this is simply how the world is and how it must be.

    Representative democracy also suffers from this filtering and management of information but to a lessor degree because political parties have the financial power to deploy propaganda and act as a self-interested layer between Bernays invisible government and the public sphere.

    In summary, direct democracy is more susceptible to propaganda.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #2
    Telemachus Telemachus is offline
    Telemachus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    7,794

    Representative democracy also suffers from this filtering and management of information but to a lessor degree because political parties have the financial power to deploy propaganda and act as a self-interested layer between Bernays invisible government and the public sphere.
    Is there any evidence to even back this up? The invisible government in our case removed the petition right of direct democracy from the people to seal power in the hands of the insiders and vested groups in charge of the political parties.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #3
    Dame_Enda Dame_Enda is offline
    Dame_Enda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    38,002

    At least "propaganda" is transparent in its agenda. The same cannot be said of lobbies that meet with politicians behind closed doors and if the Tribunals are to be believed pass more than advice to them.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #4
    Colin M Colin M is offline
    Colin M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    5,711

    Quote Originally Posted by Dame_Enda View Post
    At least "propaganda" is transparent in its agenda. The same cannot be said of lobbies that meet with politicians behind closed doors and if the Tribunals are to be believed pass more than advice to them.
    But are these people not formulating propaganda for the masses, behind closed doors?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #5
    Dame_Enda Dame_Enda is offline
    Dame_Enda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    38,002

    Quote Originally Posted by Colin M View Post
    But are these people not formulating propaganda for the masses, behind closed doors?
    Lobbyists prefer to deal with as few people as possible to push through their agenda, and it's a lot harder to convince an electorate than 82 politicians in Dail Eireann.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #6
    publicrealm publicrealm is offline
    publicrealm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    5,140

    Quote Originally Posted by Dame_Enda View Post
    At least "propaganda" is transparent in its agenda. The same cannot be said of lobbies that meet with politicians behind closed doors and if the Tribunals are to be believed pass more than advice to them.
    I do not share the general concern about the lobbyists.

    They make their case - the politicians decide - based on realpolitik and in the full knowledge of the vested interest of the lobbyist. If bungs are provided in this day and age then there is no hope for us - but I doubt that it happens now.

    I am more concerned about the behind closed doors briefings by the permanent government - the department mandarins (from the HSE etc) and the paid spinners - who have total access to ministers.

    What agenda are they pushing?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #7
    jcdf jcdf is offline
    jcdf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    6,034

    If there is only one highly unified group broadcasting the propaganda then there is a problem. But that is not often the case. On most things there is two or more groups each sending out their own messages often contradicting each other. This often has a cancelling effect negating most of the propaganda.

    I to am sceptical direct democracy.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #8
    Colin M Colin M is offline
    Colin M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    5,711

    Quote Originally Posted by Dame_Enda View Post
    Lobbyists prefer to deal with as few people as possible to push through their agenda, and it's a lot harder to convince an electorate than 82 politicians in Dail Eireann.
    For example, I am thinking 'The War on Terror' bullcrap of not so long ago was constructed by more than just a few hawkish politicians, who were on our TV screens every day.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #9
    twokidsmanybruises twokidsmanybruises is offline
    twokidsmanybruises's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    5,906

    Any time I hear of Direct Democracy, I instantly think of "The Rise and Rise of Michael Rimmer" starring Peter Cook.
    Last edited by twokidsmanybruises; 22nd May 2013 at 10:46 PM. Reason: Removed spoiler
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #10
    twokidsmanybruises twokidsmanybruises is offline
    twokidsmanybruises's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    5,906

    Quote Originally Posted by the_Observer View Post
    So begins the opening paragraphs of Edward Bernays "Propaganda" first published in 1928. It is a fact, asserts Bernays, the nephew of Sigmund Feud, that we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons "who understand the mental process and social pattern of the masses". Such persons constitute an invisible government that "pull the wires which control the public mind".

    The invisible government of Bernays is not a coordinated group of shadowy figures manipulating governments for their own ends. Rather this invisible government is in open competition with themselves for our time, our attention and our money. The fitness sector for example may compete against the computer gaming sector while both groups are apathetic and mostly unaware of the cotton industry who are nevertheless competing to shape our attitudes and desires to cotton based products.

    The group mind Bernays refers to several times throughout his book is strangely mundane and yet powerful. We live in an society with a huge number of social, political, economical, racial and religious groupings all with hundreds of subdivisions each. Each of those groups have their own leaders who influence us. It is through identifying and persuading these interconnecting groups that the masses can be influenced and our desires molded.



    Is such propaganda not an argument against direct democracy? Direct democracy is a form of democracy in which people decide on policy initiatives directly, as opposed to a representative democracy in which people vote for representatives who then decide policy initiatives.

    Modern states contain both political and economic institutions; mediating between the two is the public sphere which includes all organizations and activities capable of generating debate - TV, radio, blogs, pubs, cafes etc. The public sphere is the context in which free speech and open deliberation became a value in it's own right as individuals exercise their civil rights. A healthy public sphere is essential in any democracy, but even more so in a direct democracy: in an ideal state a government is only legitimate when it is in alignment with the majority opinion in the public sphere. But this is exactly where direct democracy becomes undone.

    In theory each person makes up their own minds in private, but in practice few of us have the time, or even the incentive, to study abstruse economies or shift through the ethical data involved in every question. So we accept shortcuts by allowing information to be filtered and organized through news channels, professors, governments, journalists etc. All mass movements have surrendered their power to mass media and the unelected experts from the bureaucratic welfare state. As Bernays argues, this is simply how the world is and how it must be.

    Representative democracy also suffers from this filtering and management of information but to a lessor degree because political parties have the financial power to deploy propaganda and act as a self-interested layer between Bernays invisible government and the public sphere.

    In summary, direct democracy is more susceptible to propaganda.


    Someone's been watching his Adam Curtis.

    Doesn't mean it's wrong.
    Last edited by twokidsmanybruises; 22nd May 2013 at 11:14 PM. Reason: Typo
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment