“…the public has been long conceptualised by elites as a “bewildered herd” abiding by “a naïve faith” in human decency and the common good, [so] democracy requires a rational and enlightened class of “cool observers” capable of managing the complex structures of democratic society, making key decisions and guarding the levers of power against the “stupidity of the average man”. For the working class incapable of making informed and rational decisions, policies must be propagated by “emotionally potent oversimplifications” that appeal to the base instincts of populations — the basic desire for safety and security.”
2. Manufacturing Consent
The manufacture of consent, described initially by Walter Lippmann (1925 p. 248), refers to an essential process in the maintenance of so-called liberal democracies where public relations (i.e. propaganda) plays an integral role in keeping order and keeping intact society’s myths and “necessary illusions” (Niebuhr, 1932). Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky later expanded Lippmann’s ideas by constructing an analytical framework known as the “Propaganda Model” (1988) which describes how corporate media, think tanks, and other influential forces operate to filter out of the public discourse points of view that might contaminate the residue of information deemed “fit to print” or broadcast.
Since the public has been long conceptualised by elites as a “bewildered herd” (Lippmann, 1925 p. 145) abiding by “a naïve faith” (Niebuhr, 1932 p. xv) in human decency and the common good, democracy requires a rational and enlightened class of “cool observers” (Niebuhr, 1932 p. xv) capable of managing the complex structures of democratic society, making key decisions and guarding the levers of power against the “stupidity of the average man” (Niebuhr, 1932 p. xv). For the working class incapable of making informed and rational decisions, policies must be propagated by “emotionally potent oversimplifications” (Niebuhr, 1932 p. xvi) that appeal to the base instincts of populations — the basic desire for safety and security. Thus, baked into the foundational organisation of contemporary democratic societies is the fallacious presupposition that the masses must be propagandized. The alternative, of course, is overt brutality typical of totalitarian regimes.
In order to successfully manufacture public consent to policies such as state-sanctioned atrocities, regime-change wars, extraordinary rendition, torture, warrantless invasions of privacy and other violations of human and democratic rights, a reliable constellation of psychological tools and techniques are necessary. These applications of psychological science leverage and exploit human vulnerabilities in reality-processing and associated behavioural tendencies. The psychological tools used to bound knowledge and manipulate perception and behaviour are typically combined into a predictable and identifiable formula, or a propaganda recipe of sorts, which can be conceptualised as exploiting human vulnerabilities in four broad psychological domains....
3.1 Exploit a traumatic instigating event (e.g. 9/11 or COVID outbreak.)
Information learned in the context of trauma becomes neurologically hardwired, and resistant to change, including from subsequent factual, logical disconfirmation and evidence (Howie & Ressler, 2020; Lisak, 2013).
3.2 Magnify the perception of danger beyond the reality of the threat; suppress information that ameliorates the threat. (e.g. exaggerate the likelihood of terror attacks, or inflate ‘case’ and death counts via misuse of PCR tests, and over-inclusive definitions of COVID death / misclassification of death).
In a state of threat, attention fixates narrowly on the perceived source of danger; threatening information feels more real and is more readily believed; thinking becomes rigid and black-and white, and peripheral, complex, nuanced information, such as analysis and evidence, is tuned out (Cisler et al., 2009; Cisler & Koster, 2010; Cohen, 2017; Constans, 2005).
3.3 Use theatre and dramatisation, to make the danger feel real (e.g. terror warnings, or lockdowns and masks)
A large body of literature demonstrates that human cognition is largely unconsciously emotion-driven. I.e. we are inclined to ‘feel’ rather than reason our way to our opinions (Redlawsk, 2006; Taber & Lodge, 2016). Accordingly, experiential versions of a proposed reality – i.e. enactments and dramatisations – e.g. ‘acting as if’ we are under terrorist attack via nightly TV terror alerts, or acting as if we are infectious agents by wearing masks, fosters greater belief in the official narrative.
3.4 Issue frequent mortality-reminders to keep thoughts of harm and death salient (e.g. frequent TV terror alerts or daily COVID cases and death counts).
Mortality-salience increases ideological conformity – when confronted with death-reminders, people are more inclined to align their opinions on social issues with what they believe to be the majority view (Renkema et al., 2008). Mortality salience also increases ‘system justification, or the tendency to defend the status quo and view existing authorities and institutions as good, right, fair and just (Sterling et al., 2016).
You state "In order to successfully manufacture public consent to policies such as state-sanctioned atrocities, regime-change wars, extraordinary rendition, torture, warrantless invasions of privacy and other violations of human and democratic rights, a reliable constellation of psychological tools and techniques are necessary."
But have people learnt nothing from Iraq, Afghanistan, 9-11, the mass shootings and and ????.
The World is a stage full of smoke and illusions.