pafret Loc: Northeast

"Taming The Bewildered Herd"

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BGBei0tgUTA/TqiA1K4tH9I/AAAAAAAAhNc/4HARyeza-C8/s1600/From+Clipboard.jpg
"Taming The Bewildered Herd"
by Noam Chomsky

"Walter Lippmann, was the Dean of American journalists, a major foreign and domestic policy critic and a major theorist of liberal democracy. Lippmann was involved in propaganda commissions and recognized their achivements. He argued that what he called a "revolution in the art of democracy," could be used to"manufacture consent," that is, to bring about agreement on the part of the public for things that they didn't want by the new techniques of propaganda. He also thought that this was a good idea, in fact necessary. It was necessary because, as he put it, "the common interests elude public opinion entirely" and can only be understood and managed by a specialized class of responsible men who are smart enough to figure things out. This theory asserts that only a small elite, the intellectual community that the Deweyites were talking about, can understand the common interests, what all of us care about, and that these things "elude the general public." This is a view that goes back hundreds of years. It's also a typical Leninist view. In fact, it has very close resemblance to the Leninist conception that a vanguard of revolutionary intellectuals take state power, using popular revolutions as the force that brings them to state power, and then drive the stupid masses towards a future that they're too dumb and incompetent to envision themselves.

The liberal democratic theory and Marxism-Leninism are very close in their common ideological assumptions. I think that's one reason why people have found it so easy over the years to drift from one position to another without any particular sense of change. It's just a matter of assessing where power is. Maybe there will be a popular revolution, and that will put us into state power; or maybe there won't be, in which case we'll just work for the people with real power: the business community. But we'll do the same thing: We'll drive the stupid masses towards a world that they're too dumb to understand for themselves.

Lippmann backed this up by a pretty elaborated theory of progressive democracy. He argued that in a properly functioning democracy there are classes of citizens. There is first of all the class of citizens who have to take some active role in running general affairs. That's the specialized class. They are the people who analyze, execute, make decisions, and run things in the political, economic, and ideological systems. That's a small percentage of the population. Naturally, anyone who puts these ideas forth is always part of that small group, and they're talking about what to do about those others. Those others, who are out of the small group, the big majority of the population, they are what Lippmann called "the bewildered herd." We have to protect ourselves from the trampling and rage of the bewildered herd. Now there are two functions in a democracy:

1. The specialized class, the responsible men, carry out the executive function, which means they do the thinking and planning and understand the noam chomsky common interests.

2. The bewildered herd, and they have a function in democracy too. Their function in a democracy is to be spectators, not participants in action. But they have more of a function than that, because it's a democracy.

Occasionally they are allowed to lend their weight to one or another member of the specialized class. In other words, they're allowed to say, "We want you to be our leader" or "We want you to be our leader." That's because it's a democracy and not a totalitarian state. That's called an e******n. But once they've lent their weight to one or another member of the specialized class they're supposed to sink back and become spectators of action, but not participants. That's a properly functioning democracy. And there's a logic behind it. There's even a kind of compelling moral principle behind it. The compelling moral principle is that the mass of the public is just too stupid to be able to understand things. If they try to participate in managing their own affairs, they're just going to cause trouble. Therefore it would be immoral and improper to permit them to do this.

We have to tame the bewildered herd, not allow the bewildered herd to rage and trample and destroy things. It's pretty much the same logic that says that it would be improper to let a three-year-old run across the street. You don't give a three-year-old that kind of freedom because the three-year-old doesn't know how to handle that freedom. Correspondingly, you don't allow the bewildered herd to become participants in action. They'll just cause trouble. So we need something to tame the bewildered herd, and that something is this new revolution in the art of democracy: the manufacture of consent.

The media, the schools, and popular culture have to be divided. For the political class and the decision maker shave to give them some tolerable sense of reality, although they also have to instill the proper beliefs. Just remember, there is an unstated premise here. The unstated premise- and even the responsible men have to disguise this from themselves- has to do with the question of how they get into the position where they have the authority to make decisions. The way they do that, of course, is by serving people with real power. The people with real power are the ones who own the society, which is a pretty narrow group. If the specialized class can come along and say, I can serve your interests, then they'll be part of the executive group. You've got to keep that quiet. That means they have to have instilled in them the beliefs and doctrines that will serve the interests of private power. Unless they can master that sk**l, they're not part of the specialized class.

So we have one kind of educational system directed to responsible men, the specialized class. They have to be deeply indoctrinated in the values and interests of private power and the state-corporate nexus that represents it. If they can get through that, then they can be part of the specialized class. The rest of the bewildered herd just has to be basically distracted. Turn their attention to something else. Keep them out of trouble. Make sure that they remain at most spectators."

-Noam Chomsky, (Excerpt: "Media Control: The Role of Media in Contemporary Politics," New York, Seven Stories Press, 2002. Image: -Maxell Audio Cassette Advertisement, 1979).
- http://violetplanet.blogspot.com/

***********
Any comments on Chomsky's sour view of our Society? Are we all s***es to a Plutocracy and our representatives simply paid, whore, psycopaths? Is he correct that our nation is one gigantic, lemon, melange of sheep, goats and flock owners?

Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI

It would not be wrong to look closer at what Chomsky has to say about Politics.

For my own personal views I want a Government with rules that leave me to function fairly no matter my standing in that system.
It is also for every one to also fit in to the system.

As I look back to what has taken place. I see that the rules of the game have been increasingly better for the Few & more detrimental for the average people.
The intelligence of the average person has increased & the need for powerful leadership has decrease.

The awareness of the average person to what is going has increased. We need a change in the quality of our leaders to match the level demanded by the average person.

Over all we need less leadership as the level of the average person in the work force is more capable to work with less supervision.
This is what we look at as the middle class.
There are too many in leadership roles that have less value to the system than average workers.
The person that sees this & acts on it may well be a welcome leader in the future.

The hope is that more people become aware of this & help make the small changes that undo the over all unfairness in the system.

MalG

This political definition not only apples to recent autocracies such as Germany, Russia, or Italy but could also apply to the previous centuries in the USA. It took WW II for the US to shake off many of the economic and social restrictions of the past. There still are those who want to control the rest of us, but the "us" is still the we, as in We the People. Ben Franklin was keenly aware of the selfishness of some who would try to scrap the Republic. Where is old 'Ben' now that we need him?

Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI

As the population is changed from the older to the younger there will be a shift in how things will be done.
As the more young better educated replace the older locked in out of date ideals.
There will be positive changes.

This all can be done with few real over all actions.
Much of what we want is easily in range.
The rules that have been put in place to help the, Few can be changed or rescinded.

no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun

Chomsky is generally considered a socialist of the Marxist type. He, and Howard Zimm are two of a kind, they h**e everything about the Western Culture American people and the worship of God. Read Zimms "A People's History of The United States" to learn about the mindset of both men.

acknowledgeurma

pafret asked, "Are we all s***es to a Plutocracy and our representatives simply paid, whore, psycopaths?"

It seems obvious that wealth confers power, but it is not the sole source; a business, political or religious position confers power; sk**l confers power; citizenship confers power. Often one source of power helps one acquire other sources of power. Many of our representatives use their own wealth to help gain their positions. Many of our representatives have found wealthy donors who have like values and goals, should they be considered whores?

acknowledgeurma

Not that it's relevant to Chomsky's argument, but Googling "is chomsky a marxist", I found:

Whilst one does not find any specific critique of Marx's writings (Chomsky admits he is not a Marx “scholar”), there are a number of inferences in his writings that Marxism represents an authoritarian tradition, although this is qualified by regular references to a supposed “left libertarian tradition” within Marxism, ...Oct 15, 2004

Libertarian Marxism refers to a broad scope of economic and political philosophies that emphasize the "anti-authoritarian" aspects of Marxism. Early currents of libertarian Marxism, known as left c*******m, emerged in opposition to Marxism–Leninism and its derivatives, such as Stalinism, Ceaușism and Maoism.

Noam Chomsky is one of a small number of high profile self-described anarchists, specifically an anarcho-syndicalist, or so-called “libertarian socialist.”May 30, 2013

Noam Chomsky most often self-identifies as a libertarian socialist (which is, generally speaking, a code-word for some sort of left-anarchist), and has at other times identified himself as an anarchist.Jan 10, 2013

pafret Loc: Northeast

Floyd, your belii that the young are better educated than their elders is unfounded. Our young have been weaned away from thinking to rote repetition of the indoctrination they have received in the schools. That education is currently more propaganda than reality and even history has been rewritten to alter facts as well as interpretations of events.

I agree there will be changes but I don't see them as being for the better.

pafret Loc: Northeast

Chomsky is quite a complex individual and his leftism or bent toward totalitarianism is dichotomous with anarchy. At times his writings would lead one to think he is almost a C*******t and others Libertarian as when he is railing about the uber-class which controls all in the above piece. This essay I would characterize as right of center-Libertarian but not anarchist.

Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI

Let me rephrase that a bit.

The information that is available to people today is much wider in content.
What is happening in most areas of life is out there for most to see.
It is much easier to see & hear what has happened & is happening.
This allows some one a better grasp on what could happen.
Making it possible to make better decisions.

While I have been on this site I have opened my mind in seeking better understanding.
Of who & what I am.
Why I believe what I believe.
I also have a greater interest in what has take place & is taking place.
I feel that I need to know what & why things are like they are.
All in the effort to be a more complete individual.
Being better able to survive in a changing World.

I feel that the youth of today will come too the realization of the real power they as individuals can have.
A person able to function as a competent individual with out micromanagement.

Middle management as it once was is being left out of the picture.
The persons that see this will become the leading business leaders of the future.

THE COMMON PERSON OF TO DAY HAS THE TOOLS & KNOW HOW TO BE ABLE TO BE THE BETTER LEADER FOR TOMORROW.