Propaganda and Debating Techniques

[illcommandante]

One innocent slip.

[Leonard]

Of course it is. I'd say it's good propaganda, but propaganda none the less. Anything designed to get a reaction from the public (that is anything more than a bare proclaiming of facts) is propaganda to one degree or another.

I remember the definition taught us by our social studies teacher in High School;
''The dissemination of information, especially of a biased and/or misleading nature that is used to promote a particular political strategy or point of view.''

So I have always assumed that the ''truth'' can never be propaganda in the true sense of the word.

But then as evolution takes hold the meaning of words change.

Look at liberal and conservative, they are now almost only used in the political sense;

Liberal, once used as in a liberal use of soap now, almost exclusively means a commie pinko stinko socialsit.
While conservative once meant conservation it now means warmongers and baby killers.

[PonderThis]

Of course it is. I'd say it's good propaganda, but propaganda none the less. Anything designed to get a reaction from the public (that is anything more than a bare proclaiming of facts) is propaganda to one degree or another.

I remember the definition taught us by our social studies teacher in High School;
''The dissemination of information, especially of a biased and/or misleading nature that is used to promote a particular political strategy or point of view.''

I don't even disagree with your dictionary definition, because propaganda is especially used to lead people in a misleading way to promote someone's special political strategy or point of view. But I don't see that as excluding the mere dissemination of information from being considered propaganda either, the first part of that definition. Indeed, I think that's where the skill comes in. In the hands of knowledgeable people, and used for purposes of good rather than evil, these are powerful tools. I recommend you and similarly enlightened people learn them, as by knowing them and thus being protected from their use by others, you might also learn to use a few of the more subtle ones yourself.

[Leonard]

Of course it is. I'd say it's good propaganda, but propaganda none the less. Anything designed to get a reaction from the public (that is anything more than a bare proclaiming of facts) is propaganda to one degree or another.

I remember the definition taught us by our social studies teacher in High School;
''The dissemination of information, especially of a biased and/or misleading nature that is used to promote a particular political strategy or point of view.''

I don't even disagree with your dictionary definition, because propaganda is especially used to lead people in a misleading way to promote someone's special political strategy or point of view. But I don't see that as excluding the mere dissemination of information from being considered propaganda either, the first part of that definition. Indeed, I think that's where the skill comes in. In the hands of knowledgeable people, and used for purposes of good rather than evil, these are powerful tools. I recommend you and similarly enlightened people learn them, as by knowing them and thus being protected from their use by others, you might also learn to use a few of the more subtle ones yourself.

You and similarly enlightened people already know the truth from fiction.

And I have worked in the political arena and know very well how to use and write propaganda, but I prefer the term ''selling a message'' if that message is the truth.

But I have indeed dealt in real propaganda for a cause. But the most fun is having an opponent just using propaganda and the joy of proving them wrong with the actual facts.

[PonderThis]

I'd like to hope that truth will prevail.

[Leonard]

I'd like to hope that truth will prevail.

You can hope, but don't be too optimistic because the truth is usually only to be found in ''real'' History books, not published in Texas.

[Machinehead]

I'd like to hope that truth will prevail.

You can hope, but don't be too optimistic because the truth is usually only to be found in ''real'' History books, not published in Texas.

What if I don't accept your version of past events as the truth? I believe in the truth mind you, but everyone claims to know it and dispense it. Even history is reconstructed to the bent of the individual historian's perspective these days.

[PonderThis]

You could check his citations for one thing.

[Wonky]

No surprise there.

I don't "get it" either.
I'm really slow, so forgive me while I run this past my eyeballs.

We stop spending on national defense.

Will there be anyone left who needs social services?

Seems I've read the first responsibility of groups who form, is defense.

And, more to the point, propaganda is seldom effective unless it has very weighty backing from some group that can broadcast it widely and often.

Mostly I wondering why I bother.

[PonderThis]

I don't think anyone suggested we stop all spending on defense totally. I think there's a happy medium somewhere between watching our own borders and being the largest single military force on the planet, with wars going simultaneously in far flung countries. And if you can't recognize the grief of a mother when it's her own child that's been killed by the madness, well, then, yes, the point might be beyond you too.

[Wonky]

I don't think anyone suggested we stop all spending on defense totally. I think there's a happy medium somewhere between watching our own borders and being the largest single military force on the planet, with wars going simultaneously in far flung countries. And if you can't recognize the grief of a mother when it's her own child that's been killed by the madness, well, then, yes, the point might be beyond you too.

Yes sir ree Bob! You got a point. It should be about NATIONAL DEFENSE! But I guess those damn Afghanis are all mounted up and ready to invade New Jersey. (I say let 'em have it).
Damn! Great ideas come to me when I'm not even trying! Let's offer the "evil doers" Texas, Oklahoma, Alaska, and Southern California, for some peace and quite.

[PonderThis]

I thought your idea of just giving them a trillion dollars and two jews not to fight us wasn't too bad, myself.

[Leonard]

I'd like to hope that truth will prevail.

You can hope, but don't be too optimistic because the truth is usually only to be found in ''real'' History books, not published in Texas.

What if I don't accept your version of past events as the truth? I believe in the truth mind you, but everyone claims to know it and dispense it. Even history is reconstructed to the bent of the individual historian's perspective these days.

Something is either true or it is not there is no gray area.

The earth revolves around the sun is a truth.

President Kennedy was killed, a truth. Did Oswald do it alone there is no proof.

That the Twin Towers were hit by planes and they collapsed as did another building that was not hit is an indisputable truth, but how they structurally gave way is disputable.

Republicans are evil. Depending on the purpose of the statement it is either a supposition or propaganda as would saying Democrats are socialist.

So people may honestly disagree but truth is still the truth and there is very little, if any grey area here; one side will have to either relinquish their views based on logic and facts or stay uninformed.

But good grief, this thread has moved in a different direction now it's National Defence.

[Wonky]

I'd like to hope that truth will prevail.

You can hope, but don't be too optimistic because the truth is usually only to be found in ''real'' History books, not published in Texas.

What if I don't accept your version of past events as the truth? I believe in the truth mind you, but everyone claims to know it and dispense it. Even history is reconstructed to the bent of the individual historian's perspective these days.

Something is either true or it is not there is no gray area.

The earth revolves around the sun is a truth.

President Kennedy was killed, a truth. Did Oswald do it alone there is no proof.

That the Twin Towers were hit by planes and they collapsed as did another building that was not hit is an indisputable truth, but how they structurally gave way is disputable.

Republicans are evil. Depending on the purpose of the statement it is either a supposition or propaganda as would saying Democrats are socialist.

So people may honestly disagree but truth is still the truth and there is very little, if any grey area here; one side will have to either relinquish their views based on logic and facts or stay uninformed.

But good grief, this thread has moved in a different direction now it's National Defence.

Hey Len, welcome to the monkey house! (Vonnegut will now turn in his grave)

We don't even shoot for continuity. The topic title must be in play for only the 1st post, by actual rule voted on and sealed in wax some years ago.

Now. Is THAT a fact, or not?

[tvguy]

Osama Ben Leon... That the Twin Towers were hit by planes and they collapsed as did another building that was not hit is an indisputable truth, but how they structurally gave way is disputable.

You throw your conspiracy theory thoughts out there and and then seem amazed at how threads morph? OK then.

ALL of the buildings collapsed because on one thing. Fire.

[bbqboy]

propaganda.

[Clone]

propaganda.

yep.
Just like Colin Powell giving his presentation to the U.N. on how Iraq had WMD's.

[tvguy]

propaganda.

Too much too ask for you to explain yourself?

[tvguy]

propaganda.

yep.
Just like Colin Powell giving his presentation to the U.N. on how Iraq had WMD's.

OR he actually thought there were WMD's in Iraq.

[Clone]

OR he actually thought there were WMD's in Iraq.

Yep, because of carefully prepared propaganda.
That durn yellow cake in Africa...a CIA operative lost a cover over that crap.