End of year quizzes are popular. You decide which, if any, of these ten war propaganda “justifications” are relevant to any of the current conflicts taking place at the present time. Or put them on your ‘bingo’ card for future use. Conflicts under capitalism will never end until the end of capitalism itself.
From the Socialist Standard October 2002
1.
“We don’t want war”
Arthur
Ponsonby had already pointed out that, before declaring war or when
they are making the declaration of war, the statesmen of all
countries, at least in modern history, always solemnly proclaim that
they did not want the war. War and its train of horrors are rarely
popular a priori and it is thus good taste to present yourself as a
lover of peace.
2.
“The opposing side is solely responsible for the war”
Arthur
Ponsonby had already noted the paradox in the First World War, which
could also no doubt be found in many previous wars: each side
proclaims that it was forced,
to
declare war to prevent the other side from putting the planet to fire
and sword.
3.
“The enemy has the face of the devil”
You
can’t hate the whole of a human group, even when it is presented as
the enemy. It is thus more effective to concentrate hatred of the
enemy onto the opposing leader. The enemy thus has a face and this
face is evidently odious. War is not carried on against the “Boshes”
or the “Japs” but more precisely against Napoleon, the Kaiser,
Mussolini, Hitler, Nasser, Gaddafi, Khomeiny, Saddam Hussein or
Milosevic. This odious bogeyman disguises the diversity of the
population they lead, amongst the ordinary citizen might find a
counterpart to identify with.
4.
“We are defending a noble cause not particular interests”
Wars
generally have as their motive a desire for geopolitical domination,
accompanied by economic reasons. But such motives for war cannot be
admitted to public opinion. Modern wars, however, are only possible
with the consent of the population, if only because parliaments have
in principle to give their agreement to war being declared. This
consent is easily obtained if the population thinks that their
independence, their honour, their freedom, or their lives, depend on
the outcome of the war and that the war is the bearer of indisputably
moral values. Propaganda has therefore to disguise certain aims and
get other aims believed in.
5.
“The enemy knowingly commits atrocities; if we blot our copybook
it’s involuntarily”
Stories
about atrocities committed by the enemy are an essential element of
war propaganda. Obviously this doesn’t mean that atrocities don’t
take place in wars. On the contrary, assassinations, armed robberies,
burnings, looting and rape seem rather to be — unfortunately —
current in all war situations and the practise of all armies, from
ancient times to the wars of the 21st century. What is specific to
war propaganda is getting people to believe that only the enemy is in
the habit of doing these things, while our own army is at the service
of the population, even the enemy’s, and is loved by them. Deviant
criminality becomes the very symbol of the enemy army alone, composed
essentially of bandits without law or faith.
6.
“The enemy is using unauthorised arms”
This
principle is a corollary of the previous one. Not only do we not
commit atrocities but we make war in a chivalrous way, respecting the
rules — as if war was a game, certainly tough but manly. Obviously
this is not the case of our enemies, who refuse to abide by the
rules. In reality, the outcome of wars can depend on the strategic
skills of the generals or on the motivation and courage of the
participants but also — mainly? — on the clear superiority of the
arms of one of the sides.
7.
“We suffer very few losses, the enemy’s losses are enormous”
With
only rare exceptions, humans generally prefer to be on the winning
side. In the case of war the support of public opinion depends on the
perceived results of the conflict. If the results are not good,
propaganda must hide our losses and exaggerate those of the enemy.
8.
“Artists and intellectuals support our cause”
Propaganda,
like all forms of advertising, is based on emotion. It is the lever
used permanently to mobilise public opinion; it can even be said that
propaganda and emotion have always been of the same nature. However,
to arouse emotion you can’t rely on civil servants. You have to
call in either advertising professionals — which the Kuwait lobby
did in calling in Hill and Knowtown who concocted for them the
touching story of babies torn from their incubators by Iraqi
soldiers—or to artists and intellectuals, who are professionally
trained to arouse emotions.
9.
“Our cause has a sacred character”
If
our cause is sacred we are obliged
to
defend it, if necessary with arms. But this sacred character can be
taken either in a literal or a broader sense. Taken literally, this
would mean that, if the cause is religious, the war is a crusade from
which nobody can opt out. And in fact the religious argument has been
used in war propaganda. Pithy formulations such as Gott
mit Uns, In God we trust, or
God
save the King will
be recalled which often accompanied the combatants and still do.
10.
“Those who question the propaganda are traitors”
Lord
Ponsonby had already noted that any attempt to cast doubt on the
stories of the propaganda services is immediately considered as a
lack of patriotism or rather as treason.
(Translated from Principes élémentaires de propagande de guerre by Anne Morelli, Editions Labor, Brussels, 2001)
No comments:
Post a Comment