00:00:00
How can there be thought control in a
00:00:01
democratic society such as the United
00:00:03
States? Isn't that a contradiction?
00:00:05
Well, it depends what you mean by
00:00:07
democracy. Uh if you mean by democracy
00:00:09
that uh ordinary people should have a
00:00:13
play a meaningful role in controlling
00:00:15
public affairs and determining decisions
00:00:19
about how the system works and so on.
00:00:21
Yeah. And it's a total contradiction.
00:00:23
But the point is that elite elements,
00:00:25
privileged elite elements have never
00:00:27
meant that by democracy. They've always
00:00:29
regarded democracy as a threat uh which
00:00:32
has to be contained and controlled. And
00:00:33
this goes way back to the uh first
00:00:36
democratic revolutions in the 17th
00:00:38
century in England. Uh as soon as it
00:00:40
became clear that you're going to lose
00:00:43
the you know that there would no longer
00:00:44
be possible to control people by force
00:00:47
it immediately followed as an almost as
00:00:49
a corollary that you're going to have to
00:00:50
control what they think. uh if you have
00:00:53
a what we nowadays call a totalitarian
00:00:56
state or a militaryrun state or
00:00:58
whatever, you really don't care much
00:01:00
about what people think. They can think
00:01:01
anything they feel like uh because you
00:01:03
can control them with a bludgeon. But as
00:01:05
the state loses its capacity to coersse
00:01:08
through uh threats or terror, just one
00:01:13
or another form of force uh then other
00:01:16
means have to be found to ensure that
00:01:18
democracy doesn't work. uh that that
00:01:20
democratic forms in other words persist
00:01:22
but without interfering with the right
00:01:25
of the privileged uh uh elements to
00:01:29
rule. Now you know what the privileged
00:01:31
elements are may differ in different
00:01:32
societies. In modern capitalist
00:01:35
democracies the privileged sectors are
00:01:38
those who own are the corporate elite
00:01:39
basically they own the country more or
00:01:41
less. in fact more not less they
00:01:44
effectively own the country and uh the
00:01:47
and they basically control the political
00:01:50
system in the United States this really
00:01:52
a one party state it's a business party
00:01:55
with two factions uh and they control
00:01:58
the media the ideological system and
00:02:01
they impose very sharp constraints on
00:02:03
any form of policy any policy that's
00:02:06
formulated even even if the political
00:02:07
system ever got out of their control
00:02:09
which is unlikely it couldn't get very
00:02:11
far out because uh the weapons of
00:02:14
capital strike and disinvestment and
00:02:17
reduction of business confidence and so
00:02:19
on are sufficient to control policy. Uh
00:02:22
so there's there's lots of mechanisms
00:02:24
that ensure that those who own the
00:02:26
country govern it and we should bear in
00:02:29
mind that that was the principle of the
00:02:31
founding fathers that those who own the
00:02:33
country ought to govern it. That's in
00:02:35
fact a quote from John J, the president
00:02:38
of the constitutional convention. uh
00:02:40
that's the way the country's founded.
00:02:41
Now the problem is how do you deal with
00:02:43
all of this when people are free as they
00:02:44
are like the state they can't send in
00:02:47
the police to break up this
00:02:48
conversation. So how do you deal with
00:02:50
that? Well a lot of mechanisms are used
00:02:53
and one of them primary one is thought
00:02:55
control indoctrination. That's what the
00:02:57
phrase necessary illusions comes from.
00:02:59
It's uh not mine. It comes from Reinhold
00:03:02
Neber who's a
00:03:05
leading theologian. He's called the
00:03:07
theologian of the establishment. He was
00:03:09
the guru for the Kennedy intellectuals
00:03:11
and you know George Kennan and so on you
00:03:13
know a major figure in modern
00:03:16
intellectual history. Uh and he pointed
00:03:19
out once that uh the
00:03:22
ordinary people don't have the capacity
00:03:25
according to him to become involved in
00:03:27
public affairs. Uh so it's the task of u
00:03:31
the what he called the cool observers
00:03:33
meaning us smart guys. It's our task to
00:03:37
impose necessary illusions and
00:03:40
emotionally potent
00:03:42
oversimplifications to keep these poor
00:03:44
simpleans on course. Uh and it would be
00:03:47
kind of unfair to let ordinary people to
00:03:50
let the democratic process really work.
00:03:53
If you really let ordinary people make
00:03:55
decisions or, you know, think about
00:03:57
things or whatever, they don't get in
00:03:59
trouble. Uh it's like letting a
00:04:02
three-year-old cross the street. You
00:04:04
know, it's it's for the interests of the
00:04:05
three-year-old that you constrain them.
00:04:08
Uh and similarly, it's to the interests
00:04:10
of the general public that you
00:04:11
marginalize them and ensure that the
00:04:13
formal political system has not very
00:04:15
much substance. Uh because it's only the
00:04:19
smart guys, the cool observers uh who uh
00:04:23
are who uh have the capacity to make the
00:04:26
right decisions. And those now it turns
00:04:28
out that the cool observers who are in a
00:04:30
position to make the right decisions are
00:04:32
those who serve the interests of private
00:04:34
power. Uh other cool observers are not
00:04:38
cool observers because they have the
00:04:39
wrong decisions. He didn't bother
00:04:41
mentioning that part. Uh and and that's
00:04:43
a very typical view. It's not just his
00:04:45
view. In fact, it's probably the
00:04:46
dominant view. So for example, the uh
00:04:49
the book that I co-authored right before
00:04:52
this one is called manufacturing consent
00:04:55
which borrows a phrase from Walder
00:04:57
Lipman. It's a sort of dean of American
00:05:00
journalists and major foreign policy
00:05:02
critic. Uh and his view sort of the same
00:05:05
was that you have to that's a it's
00:05:07
crucial part of democracy he said is the
00:05:09
manufacturer of consent.
00:05:12
the population he referred to as the
00:05:14
bewildered herd and he said we have to
00:05:16
save ourselves from the rage and
00:05:19
trampling of the bewildered herd. Uh and
00:05:22
since unfortunately you can't do it by
00:05:24
force you have to do it by other means
00:05:26
uh the other means would be the
00:05:27
manufacturer of consent uh the United
00:05:29
States the public relations industry in
00:05:31
the United States which goes back to the
00:05:33
early part of the century is dedicated
00:05:36
to that. It's a that's a pure business
00:05:38
operation and they're dedicated to it.
00:05:40
Everything from you know advertising to
00:05:43
other mechanisms of influence in which
00:05:45
they openly call and there are more
00:05:47
honest days they openly call propaganda
00:05:49
and the same is true of much of the
00:05:51
intellectual class. U it's uh it's recog
00:05:54
the more sophisticated people recognize
00:05:57
that their job is thought control and
00:05:59
they have they argue that it's the right
00:06:01
thing because the bewildered herd will
00:06:03
only get into trouble if you let them
00:06:05
rage on by themselves. You'll notice of
00:06:08
course the close similarity to Leninist
00:06:10
ideology to bulcheism which also assumes
00:06:13
that the radical intellectuals are the
00:06:16
specialized class, the vanguard. They've
00:06:18
got to lead the stupid and ignorant
00:06:20
masses to a better society. In fact, the
00:06:23
two conceptions are very much alike. I
00:06:26
think that's probably one of the reasons
00:06:27
why there's been historically such an
00:06:29
easy transition from one to another. the
00:06:32
move from being a Leninist enthusiast to
00:06:35
a you know a passionate supporter
00:06:38
of state capitalism and you know working
00:06:41
for American Ames that takes place
00:06:43
overnight it's been going on for years
00:06:46
uh it's called the god that failed
00:06:49
transition uh and it happens very simply
00:06:52
and the transition is very easy I think
00:06:54
because there isn't much of a difference
00:06:56
in ideological change uh it's just a
00:06:59
matter of where you think power lies if
00:07:01
you think there's going going to be a
00:07:02
popular revolution and you can ride that
00:07:05
revolution to state power and then wield
00:07:07
the whip over the masses, you're a
00:07:09
Leninist enthusiast. If you see that
00:07:11
that's not going to happen and power
00:07:13
lies in the state capitalist
00:07:15
institutions which you have to serve as
00:07:16
a manager, an ideological manager, you
00:07:19
do that. But it's basically a very
00:07:21
similar position. And in fact uh in the
00:07:23
last century or so since there's been a
00:07:25
more or less identifiable secular
00:07:28
intelligencia
00:07:30
uh I think you find typically that they
00:07:32
fall into one or the other of these two
00:07:34
categories. They associate themselves
00:07:37
with one or the other system of power
00:07:39
and hierarchy uh and subordination. Uh
00:07:44
in fact what I just said is almost a
00:07:46
tautology. It's only if you submit to
00:07:48
those systems that you're counted as a
00:07:50
respectable intellectual for obvious
00:07:52
reasons. Well, coming up to more modern
00:07:54
times in the postc world war period, uh
00:07:58
car you find again deep concern over the
00:08:01
need to control and deceive the public
00:08:03
to control the public mind. uh
00:08:06
presidential historian Thomas Bailey
00:08:08
wrote in 1948 at the time when we were
00:08:11
sort of setting off on a new war, the
00:08:13
Cold War, he wrote, "Because the masses
00:08:16
are notoriously shortsighted and
00:08:18
generally cannot see danger until it's
00:08:20
at their throats, our statesmen are
00:08:23
forced to deceive them into an awareness
00:08:25
of their own long run interests.
00:08:27
deception of the people may in fact
00:08:29
become increasingly necessary unless
00:08:31
we're willing to give our leaders in
00:08:33
Washington a freer hand. And uh in 1981
00:08:38
as the United States was launching a new
00:08:40
crusade for freedom uh Samuel Huntington
00:08:43
the professor of government at Harvard
00:08:46
uh said in a private but published
00:08:50
discussion interchange you may have to
00:08:52
sell intervention or other military
00:08:54
action in such a way as to create the
00:08:57
misimpression that it is the Soviet
00:08:59
Union that you're fighting. That's what
00:09:01
the United States has been doing ever
00:09:03
since the Truman doctrine. which is
00:09:05
quite accurate and gives a certain
00:09:07
insight into the nature of the cold war
00:09:10
in particular into the nature of the war
00:09:12
against Nicaragua which is what he
00:09:13
specifically had in mind. Well, these
00:09:16
concerns over uh controlling the public
00:09:19
mind tend to rise to the surface
00:09:22
particularly uh after periods of wars
00:09:25
and turmoil like the 17th century
00:09:28
revolution, the civil war or like the
00:09:30
first world war when Woodro Wilson
00:09:33
launched the major red scare which is
00:09:36
the major example in modern American
00:09:39
history all of American history of state
00:09:42
repression that was really large scale
00:09:43
and effective in destroying unions and
00:09:46
uh uh destroying independent politics
00:09:49
and eliminating independent thought and
00:09:52
so on. And the same thing happened after
00:09:54
World War II uh with the u phenomenon
00:09:58
that's mislabeled McCarthyism. It's
00:10:01
mislabeled because it was actually
00:10:02
initiated by the liberal democrats in
00:10:05
the late 1940s. McCarthy just came along
00:10:07
at the tail end of it and vulgarized it
00:10:10
a little. Uh the reason for this is and
00:10:13
uh is that um periods of wars and
00:10:16
turmoil have a tendency to uh arouse
00:10:20
people from apathy and to make them
00:10:22
think and to make them organize often.
00:10:25
So that's why you get things like the
00:10:26
red scare and McCarthyism uh right after
00:10:29
periods of war and turmoil. And the same
00:10:31
thing happened after the Vietnam war
00:10:33
which had the same effect. uh after the
00:10:35
Vietnam war uh elites were concerned
00:10:38
about what they called a crisis of
00:10:40
democracy. In fact, one of the most
00:10:42
interesting books on this topic or one
00:10:44
of the most interesting books on most of
00:10:46
the insightful books I think on modern
00:10:48
uh on the modern democratic system is
00:10:51
called the crisis of democracy. It's a
00:10:53
study the only booklength study
00:10:55
published by the trilateral commission.
00:10:58
uh it's an important group put together
00:10:59
by David Rockefeller in
00:11:01
1973 and it represents the more or less
00:11:04
liberal internationalists from the three
00:11:08
major centers of modern capitalism
00:11:10
United States, Western Europe and Japan,
00:11:13
hence trilateral. And remember this is
00:11:15
the liberals. This is the group out of
00:11:17
which Jimmy Carter and most of his
00:11:19
administration came. Uh the c what's the
00:11:22
crisis of democracy that they're
00:11:24
concerned with in all of the democratic
00:11:26
societies? Well, the crisis is that uh
00:11:29
during the
00:11:30
1960s, large groups of people who are
00:11:33
normally passive and apathetic began to
00:11:36
try to enter the political arena to
00:11:37
press their demands. Uh and that's a
00:11:40
crisis which has to be overcome. The
00:11:42
naive might call that democracy, but
00:11:44
that's because they don't understand,
00:11:45
the sophisticated understand that that's
00:11:47
a crisis of democracy. Uh the American
00:11:51
spokesman again Samuel Huntington uh
00:11:54
wrote in his report that Harry Truman
00:11:57
had been able to govern the country with
00:11:59
the cooperation of a relatively small
00:12:01
number of Wall Street lawyers and
00:12:03
bankers. In those days there was no
00:12:05
crisis of democracy. Things were working
00:12:07
just right. But in the 1960s you got all
00:12:10
this turmoil. I mean young people and
00:12:12
women and you know labor. I mean all
00:12:15
kinds of weird people who were supposed
00:12:16
to be sitting quietly in the corners
00:12:19
began to get involved and caused this
00:12:21
crisis. I mean the same crisis that
00:12:23
arose in the 17th century and that
00:12:25
repeatedly arises uh when people begin
00:12:28
to try to take advantage of the uh uh
00:12:31
formal opportunities that exist. Uh
00:12:35
among the terrible things that were
00:12:36
happening during the 60s causing this
00:12:38
crisis they said was that you had this
00:12:40
group of people who they called
00:12:41
valueoriented intellectuals. uh people
00:12:44
who are concerned with things like truth
00:12:46
and justice and all that sort of
00:12:47
nonsense. Uh and they're opposed to the
00:12:50
good guys, the technocratic and policy
00:12:52
oriented intellectuals. They called them
00:12:54
the commaars, the ones who just do the
00:12:57
job, you know, which had these
00:12:58
valueoriented intellectuals and they
00:13:00
were doing all sorts of horrible things
00:13:02
like uh under delegitimizing the
00:13:06
institutions that are responsible for
00:13:07
the indoctrination of the young like
00:13:10
schools and universities. Remember this
00:13:12
is an internal discussion so they kind
00:13:14
of let their hair down. Uh their general
00:13:17
proposal at the end of all of this these
00:13:19
lengthy and thoughtful discussions was
00:13:21
that what we need is more moderation in
00:13:23
democracy to mitigate the excess of
00:13:26
democracy and to overcome the crisis. Uh
00:13:29
in plain terms, what that means is that
00:13:31
the public has to be reduced to their
00:13:33
proper state of apathy and obedience and
00:13:36
driven from the public arena if
00:13:38
democracy is to survive and the
00:13:40
appropriate sense with the specialized
00:13:43
class, you know, the cool observers, us
00:13:45
smart guys, u the technocratic and
00:13:48
policy oriented intellectuals doing our
00:13:50
job in the interests of the people who
00:13:52
have real power. Uh that's the liberal
00:13:54
side. I won't go into what the
00:13:57
reactionary side says about the matter.
00:14:00
The most prominent modern American
00:14:03
political scientist Harold Lasswell
00:14:05
who's a leading figure in communications
00:14:08
and such things uh he wrote the article
00:14:11
on propaganda in the international
00:14:13
encyclopedia of social sciences which
00:14:15
was published in 1933.
00:14:18
uh and in it he says that we should not
00:14:20
succumb to democratic dogmatisms about
00:14:23
men being the best judges of their own
00:14:25
interests. They are not. The best judges
00:14:29
are the elites, us smart guys, the cool
00:14:32
observers. And we must therefore be
00:14:34
insured the means to impose our will for
00:14:38
the common good. Of course, this he said
00:14:40
will require a whole tech new technique
00:14:43
of control largely through propaganda
00:14:45
because of the ignorance and
00:14:47
superstition of the masses. Same theme
00:14:49
all the way through. Uh the basic
00:14:53
problem is this. Uh the idea is that if
00:14:56
you have a society in which the voice of
00:14:58
the people is heard, you got to make
00:15:00
sure that that voice says the right
00:15:01
thing. In totalitarian societies, it's
00:15:04
not a big problem. You you got a club in
00:15:07
your hand. uh and if people don't behave
00:15:09
the right way, you hit them with a club
00:15:10
or threaten them with it. So it doesn't
00:15:12
really matter much what they think. What
00:15:14
matters is what they do and that you
00:15:16
control by force. But as the capacity of
00:15:19
the state to control by force erodess,
00:15:22
it's necessary to control what people
00:15:24
think. And in fact, I think you find
00:15:26
much more sophisticated concern uh for
00:15:29
thought control precisely as the society
00:15:32
becomes more free. I don't think it's
00:15:35
surprising that the sophisticated
00:15:37
discussion uh things like the public
00:15:39
relations industry and the academic u
00:15:43
side of it and you know the journalistic
00:15:45
side and all the kinds of things I've
00:15:47
been sampling uh I suspect if one did a
00:15:49
comparative study you'd find that they
00:15:51
develop primarily in relatively free
00:15:53
societies. Ours is a very free society
00:15:56
in the sense that the state has by
00:15:58
comparative standards very limited
00:16:00
resources to control by force and I
00:16:03
think it's undoubtedly in fact the most
00:16:05
sophisticated in the terms of in the
00:16:08
reliance on techniques of indoctrination
00:16:10
and control public relations industry in
00:16:12
particular as a an American creation
