The challenge for everyone is to read past propaganda and the “ideological guise” of a particular party or group and in turn determine their true motives and goals. Nevertheless, what is required in order to garner recognition and to gain power is an effective propaganda campaign. Propaganda is a sort of “weapon” when it can effectively gain recruits or supporters for a group. To borrow from Morgenthau: “Contemporary propaganda is quantitatively and qualitatively different from that of previous ages. Because of modern technology, its range and effectiveness have increased enormously since the Second World War. It has become an autonomous instrument of foreign policy, co-ordinated with the traditional instruments of diplomacy and military force.”
It follows that propaganda and information are one of the three basic elements of power and control in general, aside from military and economic power. The strength of one group vis-à-vis another group depends on how effective their propaganda campaign is in not only getting people to support their group, but also turning people against another group. Propaganda amounts to “the use and creation of intellectual convictions, moral valuations, and emotional preferences in support of one’s own interests.” Propaganda is a “struggle for minds” but in a sense that “it endeavors to mold the minds of men directly rather than through the intermediary of the manipulation of interests or physical violence.”
There are three “problems” which the “principles” of propaganda seek to resolve, as Morgenthau argued:
- Content and its effectiveness
- The relation between propaganda and the life experiences and interests of those whom propaganda tries to reach
- The relation between propaganda and the foreign policy as whose instrument propaganda serves
For one, propaganda has to be true in order to be effective. But what is even more important than the need for propaganda to be true is whether the propaganda “satisfies deeply felt intellectual and political needs.” For instance, race theory is what the Germans apparently needed in order to resurrect themselves after their defeat in World War I. People expect simple and straightforward explanations for everything. To borrow from Morgenthau: “The popular mind, baffled by the bewildering complexity of international relations in our time, longs for an explanation that is both simple and plausible.” And the simplest and most plausible explanation for the popular mind is one based on economics. As Morgenthau wrote: “The economic interpretation, by providing it, puts the popular mind at rest. It fulfills for political action a function similar to those performed by the race theories.”
Moreover, ideas are receptive or not depending on the circumstances which prevail in a society. Propaganda cannot be “divorced from the life experiences of the common man” and in turn the philosophy which is being expressed through propaganda cannot stand in contrast to the life experiences of the people who are receiving the propaganda. For instance, American propaganda fails around the world when American bombs are used to kill children in Gaza or anywhere else. In short: “The policies that the United States supported or seemed to support made success in the war of ideas impossible.”
It follows that propaganda is always intertwined with policy, in the sense that policy compels one to “define clearly its objectives and the methods through which it proposes to attain them” while being cognizant of “popular aspirations” and whether the propaganda “is capable of supporting political policy.” In other words, if the propaganda does not match the policy that is being put into practice and the policy goals that are trying to be attained, then the propaganda will fail to justify the policy in the eyes of the broader public and international community.
Adam A. Azim 