Feb 18, 2021
0 0

To the 400th anniversary of propaganda: the same, there and about the same

To the 400th anniversary of propaganda: the same, there and about the same

Photo: Global Look Press

Propaganda has a “birth certificate” and even a dad. According to the horoscope she is “cancer”, because she was born in June 1622, thanks to the order of the Pope Gregory XV on the creation of the Sacra Congregatio de Propaganda Fide – Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith.

The new institution of the AP (Pope’s Administration) was conceived as a conductor of Catholicism to the countries of the then third-fourth-fifth world, and later to oppose the active “dissident movement” heading there. Dissidens – literally “dissent”, so they called “schismatics among schismatics”, various religious movements of Protestants. Judge for yourself how clever it is to use the “covid-dissident” cliché imposed nowadays, because one cannot “agree” or “disagree” with viruses, but very much even with the measures taken.

However, now about something else. “Propaganda” could have received another name, say “expansion”. The Latin expansio also has in one of its meanings the meaning of “spread”, but dad called it that, and we are used to it, so next year the 400th anniversary of “propaganda” is coming.

They will object, they say, the formation of public opinion began as soon as this very society appeared. Who would argue, for sure, the first leaders noticed that managing a team with sounds is much less energy-intensive than with clubs. And when people began to actively exchange with each other, it took a special skill to not only inform others about what was needed, but also for the sake of persuading them to do something that was not quite necessary, or even to encourage them to do something completely unnecessary.

According to legend, marketing has been solved yet Socrates, who loved to walk around the bazaars, saying: “There are so many things here that I can so easily do without.” Traders have always been ahead in communications, firstly, there is more practice, and secondly, the payment for mistakes is specific.

To argue about the dangers and benefits of propaganda in general is like arguing with a drunkard about the “Don’t drink!” Poster. Or spread rot Mary Vanna for spreading about 2X2 = 4, and she also gets money for it. After all, a drunkard, probably in childhood, was also taught about alcohol, and Mary Vanna, how does she ignite the aspiration for mathematics or, on the contrary, “extinguishes”?

The same traders noticed that nature abhors a vacuum. No wonder, for example, Coca-Cola spends huge budgets on maintaining the brand, although it would seem. But the company understands that if you “fold”, the resulting “hole” will be immediately filled by competitors, with all the ensuing consequences. As happened with Soviet and anti-Soviet propaganda. When they stopped persuading and began to endlessly repeat the past. And without the development of a new quality, banal quantitative repetition is no longer a “mother of learning”, but an ordinary “stutter”.

From the great to the ridiculous, the path is short. It seems to be quite recently by historical standards, in March 1958 Edward Hunter (it was he who coined the term – brainwashing “brainwashing”), spoke at a hearing in the US Congress: “The advantage of the communists in propaganda is obvious.” Or another aspect.

In World War I, the Germans spared no expense in ideological indoctrination of the enemy and the results were, and what were the results: from desertion and fraternization on the fronts to Russia’s withdrawal from the war. Of course, here is not only the merit of the German “agitprop”, we will not exaggerate, but he made a certain contribution. The main message was precise: what to die for? For the “Rasputin” tsar? For incomprehensible “interests”?

During World War II (only leaflets on Soviet positions dropped up to 5 billion), many topics of German propaganda have not only not changed since ancient times, but were also added: from “the dominance of Jewish commissars” to “massacre in the interests of the Anglo-American imperialists” (this actively popularized Vlasov). However, despite “Zhdanovawho gnawed on cakes in besieged Leningrad “and”Stalinwho shot millions ”, the USSR won that war. What is the reason?

The answer, oddly enough, can be found in Vlasov’s address to the “people” from 1943: “… I saw that nothing that the Russian people fought for during the civil war, they did not receive as a result of the victory of the Bolsheviks …”.

And a little higher he is: “I am the son of a poor peasant from a large family, was born in the Nizhny Novgorod province … I went from an ordinary soldier to an army commander and deputy front commander. I was awarded the Orders of Lenin, the Red Banner and the Medal of the XX Years of the Red Army … “

If “the people got nothing”, then how did you “the son of a poor peasant” manage to become a commander? An exception? Well, then look at other biographies and it will become clear that that Soviet propaganda, although it “painted” reality, was not frank “Narnia”. As the Roman emperor said much earlier Marcus Aurelius about the conspirators against their power: “We did not live so badly that they won.”

Why propaganda mutates into “propaganda” (this is not about a method, this is an assessment) is a long question for another time. But the first sign of degeneration is when more and more calls to “work with young people” begin to sound. Well, just work, why shout in vain? Or “the same, in the same place, in the same and about the same” the youth no longer perceives?

The older the brain, the less fresh neural connections are formed – preference is given to the already established ones. According to neuroscientists, by the age of 35, most of us cease to perceive new music, and by 40 we no longer want to try unusual food. Thus, it is much easier to keep the attention of an age audience than to “switch” the attention of young people to yourself. For example, even the TV rating system is tailored for an “elderly and sedentary subject,” as Konstantin Ernst put it (and he understands it!). The problem is not with the “old songs about the main thing.” Targeting such a “segment” is a waste of money if it means not entertainment, but propaganda. I emphasize – PROPAGANDA. Sedentary “dvizhuha” do not suit.

Article Categories:

Leave a Reply