Writing as Resistance

“The Goal: an era of investigative poesy wherein one can be controversial, radical, and not have the civilization rise up to smite down the bard. To establish and to maintain it. POETS MAY REMAIN IN THE RADIX, UNCOMPROMISING, REVOLUTIONARY, SEDITIOUS, ABSOLUTE.” —Ed Sanders, 1976

Investigative Poetry. Essays. Articles. Poems? Sure.

Another Theory on the Proposed “Cybernetic” Model of Doing Propaganda

Propaganda-managed democracy

The indoctrinated exceptionalism of the American subject is often what is spoken to in imperialist disinformation. However, indoctrinated exceptionalism may likely be one of the common themes of state propaganda generally. It would appear to be a strategy for capture of the ego in neurotic ways that make the subject reliant, compliant, obedient; though covertly, in a fashion which simply happens automatically, emotionally, though appears commonsensical, voluntary. By neurotic here I suppose it means it preys on feelings of vulnerability and insignificance, whereby the exceptionalism provides an easy manipulation of that, by offering the subject a power fantasy to project themselves into.

Successful disinformation appeals to the inborn prejudices of a conditioned subject. In terms of imperialist propaganda, it is often an ideology of exceptionalism. With exceptionalism too comes the justification of evil through that very exception, as being justified for the greater good. In this way, the inherent evil gets projected onto the enemy.

A journalist, or influencer, will be passed certain information from a reliable source, and especially a special source they have cultivated, as a reflection of their status as a journalist or influencer. Though that information will have originated from a source of imperial propaganda. The journalist or influencer will report this information to their audience. The audience, like the journalist or influencer themselves, will take the information as true on the authority of the journalist or influencer, as they did on the authority of their source. In this way, the dissemination of false information occurs ultimately in a “managed” way, and without any deliberate censorship or authoritarian control over actual speech. This all to basically paraphrase the model of manufacturing of consent.

It is perhaps most nefarious when such an influencer or journalist will position themselves as having a left bias. But these types of figures are perhaps the most critical to influence, for it provides the cover of a left viewpoint, while reinforcing the status quo.

Lastly, to possibly consider categories here, it could perhaps be distinguished that, disinformation is an activity of espionage, and is the act of deliberately lying or creating false information. Those who take the disinformation as fact however, then unconsciously produce propaganda. Why it happens unconsciously essentially has to do with the perception management touched on from earlier in which the subject disseminates the false information completely willingly, and under the impression the information is correct.

To go even further in a hypothesized cybernetic model. Take also the category of bias. I have mentioned the more nefarious way that a source perceived to be left-leaning would actually exhibit an imperialist bias. If the categories of left and right become demographics, identities that consumers care deeply about, then, these biases could also be manipulated to keep debate within predefined margins of what constitutes an acceptable identity for one or the other position. In this way, an anti-imperial argument could be framed by a platform with a nominal left-leaning bias, as constitutive of the counter-argument that defines their current purported identity. More simply, a real left position could be framed by a pseudo-left-leaning platform as being to the right. I suppose its “cybernetic” character is to understand this process as a kind of feedback corrective.

Feed in positions to be avoided, such that they are modeled as intense objects of debate, and ones which will carry with them negative identities within the demographic to which the particular subject belongs.