Vineland

[andrew at cee.hw.ac.uk]

davemarc at panix.com writes:
> Andrew and I seem to have a fundamental difference of opinion when it comes
> to comparing Nazi Germany with modern America.

Tis true. The difference is fundamental.

> Even though he doesn't say "please" when he writes "don't tell me
> advertising..." I'll respect Andrew's wish.  My wish is that, if he wishes
> to make this kind of argument, he addresses difference as well as
> commonality.  Sure, an advertisement for M&D can be said to be the same
> thing as "Triumph of the Will," but the difference outweighs the
> similarity.  "Triumph of the Will" was much more expensive to produce, for
> one thing.  US TV being the "most obvious inheritor of this particular Nazi
> tradition"?  The "most obvious"?  I doubt it.  Maoist propaganda--the
> statues, the tracts, the ubiquitous television pronouncements, the
> controlled film industry, the indoctrination of children (Goebbels said, in
> "Triumph of the Will" that winning over the minds and souls of the children
> was essential to prolonging the life of the Reich), the overwhelming
> suppression of domestic dissent through widespread detention and
> murder--seems to blow away US TV (Ellen "comes out" tonight!) in this
> respect.  And I wonder if some of our South African participants would like
> to critique their government's propagandization in light of that produced
> by the Nazis.  There are differences galore at work here, including the
> world of difference between "fascist" (a la Nazi propaganda) and
> "fascistic" (which, I recognize, can arguably be applied to US
> advertising).

I'm recalling a point made in Vineland where the onset of the Reagan
years is claimed to have qualitatively changed the nature of the
security services' (FBI/CIA) task. Rather than having to `turn'
youngsters through disillusioning them of their youthful faith in
rebellion, the flat-foots and spooks find that the young are queueing
up to join The Force. The US did indeed go through its strident,
martial propaganda phase after the war. But rather than spend this
inheritance US capitalist has invested it in far more subtle and
sophisticated means of persuasion.

Surely no one in China is naive enough to take blatant, direct
propaganda at face value. If it works it is because it is a constant
reminder of the lack of opportunity to decide upon one's own fate. You
have to accept this because in practice there is nothing else on
offer, so let's just recognise how little control you have as an
individual and much worse it will be for you if you try to resist. In
the US the propaganda of advertising works much better because it
leaves people feeling that they are making their own choices whilst
ensuring at the same time that any such choices are selected from a
severely restricted and carefully controlled palette. Like giant
supermarkets which offer shoppers a choice of half a dozen types of
lettuce only its the same choice across a whole continent and the
result of promoting such a narrow section of available produce at such
high intensity is to remove all possibility of botanic diversity. US
TV/advertising does not need to employ the strident hard sell of older
propaganda. It's already won the war. The choices it presents, the
questions it gets you to consider are predictable, institutionalised
(remember get them asking the right questions and you don't need to
worry about the answers).  Just like in Vineland people's minds have
alreday been washed and the only requirement is for advertising and TV
to sweep the corners now and again to remove the occasional cobweb of
doubt. Yes America is different. It's the same old story - the rich
using their wealth to deny opportunity to the poor - only in the US it
has been refined and refined to the point where it is a pushover.


Andrew Dinn
-----------
And though Earthliness forget you,
To the stilled Earth say:  I flow.
To the rushing water speak:  I am.