Propagandizing Ourselves to Death
or
Statesmen as Ad Men
Listen, ever since Bush '41's Operation Just Cause (or, as I always think of it, Operation Just 'Cause), I've been concerned about the turn our own government has taken towards sticking catchy nicknames on its endeavors in order to trick us into supporting them. Look, this is a tactic worthy of corporate goons, but we should not tolerate it from our own government. If a cause is just, you probably don't have to name it 'Just Cause' in order to get people to recognize its justness. I long for the days (terminologically speaking) of Operation Overlord, The Manhattan Project and Operation Olympus. I look forward with fear and trepidation to the days, perhaps not too far off, of 'Operation Virtuous Righteousness' and 'The Motherhood and Apple Pie Act.'
The latest and most galling terminological abominations are 'The Patriot Act' and 'Operation Iraqi Freedom.' The latter was, of course, never really aimed at the freedom of Iraqis--everybody knows that's bullshit even if not everybody can admit it. But what really makes me crazy is 'The Patriot Act' (not to mention the Patriot Act itself, which is a different story and a more profound source (and perhaps result) of craziness).
There's nothing particularly patriotic about the Patriot Act. Even its proponents must admit that its not any more patriotic than any of thousands of other acts we could cite. It certainly ranks way, way below, say, the Freedom of Information Act. But if you don't like that example, it won't take you long to think of your own.
No, the Patriot Act is named 'the Patriot Act' in part because its proponents recognized at some level that it was NOT particularly patriotic. It may be, on the whole, a good thing. I don't have an opinion about that because I don't know what's in it. Neither do you, incidentally, and neither do your congresspersons. Few if any people know everything that's in it; most don't know anything that's in it. But we all know that there are at least some things in it that at least border on violating important American principles (concerning e.g. privacy, including e.g. searches and seizures). Perhaps there are no actual violations, or perhaps such violations are warranted. I'm not speaking to that right now. What I'm interested in here is the fact that our government reacted to their recognition of these problems not by being honest about them, but by tarting the thing up with a meretricious name.
I've asserted before that democracy is basically rule by the uninformed (myself included), and all most people know about the Patriot Act is its name. Because this is generally how things work around these parts, it is particularly important for our representatives in government to resist the urge to engage in such terminological propaganda. And it is particularly important that we not stand for it when they give in to the urge.
I suppose that the tendency discussed above is merely a special case of the more general tendency of certain elements in our government to mislead us, to turn American propaganda on Americans. So it's that more general tendency that we should take aim at. Still, this more limited expression of that general tendency is as good a place to start as any.
or
Statesmen as Ad Men
Listen, ever since Bush '41's Operation Just Cause (or, as I always think of it, Operation Just 'Cause), I've been concerned about the turn our own government has taken towards sticking catchy nicknames on its endeavors in order to trick us into supporting them. Look, this is a tactic worthy of corporate goons, but we should not tolerate it from our own government. If a cause is just, you probably don't have to name it 'Just Cause' in order to get people to recognize its justness. I long for the days (terminologically speaking) of Operation Overlord, The Manhattan Project and Operation Olympus. I look forward with fear and trepidation to the days, perhaps not too far off, of 'Operation Virtuous Righteousness' and 'The Motherhood and Apple Pie Act.'
The latest and most galling terminological abominations are 'The Patriot Act' and 'Operation Iraqi Freedom.' The latter was, of course, never really aimed at the freedom of Iraqis--everybody knows that's bullshit even if not everybody can admit it. But what really makes me crazy is 'The Patriot Act' (not to mention the Patriot Act itself, which is a different story and a more profound source (and perhaps result) of craziness).
There's nothing particularly patriotic about the Patriot Act. Even its proponents must admit that its not any more patriotic than any of thousands of other acts we could cite. It certainly ranks way, way below, say, the Freedom of Information Act. But if you don't like that example, it won't take you long to think of your own.
No, the Patriot Act is named 'the Patriot Act' in part because its proponents recognized at some level that it was NOT particularly patriotic. It may be, on the whole, a good thing. I don't have an opinion about that because I don't know what's in it. Neither do you, incidentally, and neither do your congresspersons. Few if any people know everything that's in it; most don't know anything that's in it. But we all know that there are at least some things in it that at least border on violating important American principles (concerning e.g. privacy, including e.g. searches and seizures). Perhaps there are no actual violations, or perhaps such violations are warranted. I'm not speaking to that right now. What I'm interested in here is the fact that our government reacted to their recognition of these problems not by being honest about them, but by tarting the thing up with a meretricious name.
I've asserted before that democracy is basically rule by the uninformed (myself included), and all most people know about the Patriot Act is its name. Because this is generally how things work around these parts, it is particularly important for our representatives in government to resist the urge to engage in such terminological propaganda. And it is particularly important that we not stand for it when they give in to the urge.
I suppose that the tendency discussed above is merely a special case of the more general tendency of certain elements in our government to mislead us, to turn American propaganda on Americans. So it's that more general tendency that we should take aim at. Still, this more limited expression of that general tendency is as good a place to start as any.
posted by Winston Smith at
10:11 AM
4 Comments:
Seems to me the main problem is its cheapening of language. The lawmakers don't believe it's "patriotic", and I suspect they don't think we believe it either, so it drains these words of meaning, giving them the same empty-syllable status as "thank you" and "how are you".
Perhaps, like Fox News trademarking "Fair and Balanced" it's an attempt to turn a product into something it's not, through simple repetitive association?
What's fun is that the full name of the act is "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism", or USA PATRIOT. (If I recall correctly, this was a compromise between competing names "USA" and "PATRIOT".)
While I find the bill and the name repugnant, I am impressed by the effort they must have put into back-forming that acronym. (Obviously, the easy ways to get acronym expansions weren't appropriate.)
Damn, Dave, that thing's FUN.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home