By James F. Tracy
Over ninety years ago political analyst Walter Lippmann noted how the
 masses rely on independent conjectures–“the pictures in our heads,” or 
what he termed “stereotypes”–to make sense of the world. “The 
stereotype,” Edward Bernays similarly observed, “is the basis of a large
 part of the work of the public relations counsel.”[1]
Along these lines, Australian propaganda researcher
 Alex Carey observed how among all countries in the world the United 
States has the greatest tendency for possessing a “Manichean” 
worldview—one where social and political phenomena are typically 
perceived as binary opposites of good-evil, sacred-satanic, and so 
on.[2] Such a belief system is anticipated and encouraged by the 
carefully-crafted propaganda and disinformation that pervades government
 pronouncements and corporate news reportage and commentary on both 
foreign and domestic affairs.
US public opinion is overall against military 
action against Syria. Yet this attitude obscures the fact that a similar
 majority doesn’t understand that the Obama administration and its 
allies have for over two years supported an intense guerrilla war in 
Syria that has killed close to one hundred thousand inhabitants and 
displaced over one million.
A New York Times-commissioned public 
opinion poll reveals that while Americans are skeptical of President 
Obama’s attempt to sell them a new war, with seventy-two percent wishing
 to refrain from inflicting “US democracy” on Syria. A subsequent 
question suggests the American public’s unfamiliarity with the grave 
situation in that country.
“Based on what you have seen or read,” the poll 
asks, “do you think the Syrian government probably did or probably did 
not use chemical weapons against Syrian civilians?” An overwhelming 
seventy-five percent responded that it “probably did,” ten-percent said 
that it “probably did not,” and the remaining fifteen-percent had no 
opinion.[3]
In other words, nine out of ten Americans are 
unmindful toward the true geopolitical underpinnings of the Syrian 
crisis apart from White House propaganda and its heavy reverberation via
 the corporate media.
A Pew Research Center poll offers similar findings,
 with fifty-three percent replying that there is “clear evidence” that 
Bashar al-Assad’s government “used chemical weapons against civilians”, 
versus twenty-three percent responding that there was “not clear” 
evidence of such, and an amazing twenty-four percent claiming 
ignorance.[4]
Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry’s position 
that Assad is guilty of such crimes is based on doubtful evidence that 
initially included a photograph taken in Iraq in 2003 of a child leaping
 over piles of shrouded bodies.[5]
On the other hand, the “rebels” operating in Syria 
have clear chemical weapons capabilities. This was proven in May when 
members of the Al-Nusra front were caught by Turkish police preparing to
 deploy two kilograms of sarin gas inside Turkey and Syria.[6]
Yet such observations may be easily obscured or 
dismissed—particularly for the educated classes–as the guardians of 
proper thought deem them among the many “anti-American conspiracy 
theories,”[7] a term that intends to short-circuit any inquiry among 
those inclined think twice about conflicting information in news 
reports.
The experts who craft the “war on terror” 
propaganda recognize how truly effective publicity must be direct and 
unambiguous. The official narrative rests on the still broadly-held 
notion that that US and its allies are “the good guys.”
Proclamations concerning the triumph of genuinely 
independent fact-based analytical reports of the tragic situation in 
Syria are thus premature. Despite the cracks and fissures in the 
official “war on terror” narrative initiated by alternative media, it is
 still more or less accepted by a US populace that the western-backed 
Al-Qaeda mercenaries operating in Syria are indeed “protesters,” 
“activists,” and “rebels.”
The effectiveness of such propaganda rests in the 
fact that such figures are routinely depicted throughout mainstream news
 outlets wielding machine guns, grenade launchers, and other 
sophisticated weaponry while they frolic throughout the country.
9/11 and the subsequent brutal and calculated 
military onslaughts that have unfolded Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and now
 Syria cannot emerge as prevailingly uncontested historical events 
without a citizenry relegated to the hinterlands of what passes for 
today’s civil society—indeed, without a mass man willing to abandon his 
own reason and embrace the carefully constructed pictures in his head.
Notes
[1] Mark Landler and Megan Thee-Brenan, “Survey Reveals Scant Backing for Syria Strike,” New York Times, September 10, 2013.
[2] “Public Opinion Runs Against Syrian Air Strikes,” Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, September 3, 2013.
[3] “’CIA Fabricated Evidence to Lure US Into War with Syria,’” RT.com, September 9, 2013; Julie Wilson, “Bombshell: Kerry Caught Using Fake Photos to Fuel Syrian War,” Infowars.com, August 30, 2013.
[4] “Turkish Police Seizes 2 kg of Sarin Gas From Al-Nusra Militants,” Voltaire.net, May 31, 2013.
[5] Walter Lippmann, Public Opinion, New York: The New Press, 1997 (1922); Edward Bernays, Crystallizing Public Opinion, New York: Ig Publishing (1923), 115.
[6] Alex Carey, Taking the Risk Out of Democracy: Corporate Propaganda Versus Freedom and Liberty, Andrew Lohrey, ed., Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1996.
[7] Jon Lee Anderson, “Putin and the Syria Conspiracy Theory Problem,” The New Yorker, September 6, 2013. See also, Jamelle Bouie, “Enough Already: Syria Wasn’t A False Flag Operation,” The Daily Beast, September 10, 2013.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario