Propaganda, socialism and feminism

Someone asked about propaganda, and I promised I would comment on that. For anyone who thinks he is immune to propaganda, this may change his mind.

I don’t know what the connections were between Edward Bernays (a nephew of Sigmund Freud) and the Frankfurt School, or whether he even had any with them (I would be very surprised if he did not have any), but he was a key influence in the field of propaganda, advertising and public relations, not just in the US but for much of the world. When he died in 1995, at age 93, he was still charging consulting fees at the rate of $10,000 an hour.

Wikipedia has a fairly detailed article about him.  Read that article to understand what he did and how influential he was.

I mention Edward Bernays here because he wrote a book, “Propaganda” (1928), and because copies of that book were on the bookshelves of Hitler and his Propaganda-Minister, Joseph Goebbels.

Edward Bernays wrote in his book “Propaganda”:

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. . . . The important thing is that [propaganda] is universal and continuous; and in its sum total it is regimenting the public mind every bit as much as an army regiments the bodies of its soldiers.

Hitler and cohort used propaganda to construct and consolidate their power. Hitler wrote:

The function of propaganda does not lie in the scientific training of the individual, but in calling the masses’ attention to certain facts, processes, necessities, etc., whose significance is thus for the first time placed within their field of vision….

All propaganda must be popular and its intellectual level must be adjusted to the most limited intelligence among those it is addressed to. Consequently, the greater the mass it is intended to reach, the lower its purely intellectual level will have to be. But if, as in propaganda for sticking out a war, the aim is to influence a whole people, we must avoid excessive intellectual demands on our public, and too much caution cannot be extended in this direction….

The receptivity of the great masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan….

The function of propaganda is, for example, not to weigh and ponder the rights of different people, but exclusively to emphasize the one right which it has set out to argue for. Its task is not to make an objective study of the truth, in so far as it favors the enemy, and then set it before the masses with academic fairness; its task is to serve our own right, always and unflinchingly.

—Hitler, in “Mein Kampf”, Chapter VI

There you have it, a recipe of how propaganda is put to effective use — not much about Pavlovian conditioning in that, right? It is far more simple, but it works, and it works all the better when the masses targeted by propaganda have limited intelligence, the more limited the better. That, of course, can be much enhanced if the effectiveness of a long-standing program of propaganda is augmented by a long-standing program of dumbing down the curriculum, so as to make sure that the masses are being dumbed down to sufficiently limit their intelligence.

Under ideal circumstances a smart government ensures that it controls both, the propaganda is feeds to the people and the limits of the intelligence of the people it indoctrinates. What better means of control can there be than to have the government use the education system and its extensions, the media, to deliver the propaganda with which to indoctrinate the people?

Napoleon did it, Lenin did it, Stalin did it, Hitler did it and even raised the art of propaganda to a science, Mao Tse-tung did it, and they were neither the first nor the last to make propaganda work well. The more totalitarian a regime is, the more effective its propaganda becomes.

It does not matter so much who is in control as it matters what ideology is in control and how tight the control by that ideology is. We live in a feminist-totalitarian system, and the feminists control everything. They control all sectors and institutions of society, but most importantly, they control the propaganda that is being fed to the masses, they control the government, and they control the education system and the media.

There has never been a totalitarian regime in the history of mankind whose control of political and social power was so absolutely total, maybe and perhaps with the exception of North Korea, but not even North Korea has government policies in place for the deliberate deconstruction of its families.

You may think that by providing some of Hitler’s thoughts about propaganda I lend support to the theory that the feminists should properly be called feminazis. That is not so.

Read communist propaganda in its original form, and you will find that feminism is nothing other than a branch of communism, that its dialectics are copied verbatim from communist dialectics such as by Marx and Engels, and that their major aims vary not the slightest from those of Mao Tse-tung.

Erin Pizzey reported frequently that when she communicated with the feminists in the UK in the 1960s and ’70s, they had posters of Mao and Che Guevara on the walls of their living rooms and copies of The little Red Book on their coffee tables.

Check these links:

  1. The Communist Manifesto
  2. The Little Red Book, Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-tung, Chapter 31, “Women”, “Women” (Look it up. It’s only a little more than one page.)
This entry was posted in Feminism, Propaganda Exposed, Social-Destruction Enterprise, The New World Order. Bookmark the permalink.