The online dictionary defines a slogan as, "a phrase expressing the aims or nature of an enterprise, organization, or candidate; a motto" as well as "a phrase used repeatedly, as in advertising or promotion." (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/slogan). Sloganism is a powerful tool. People and groups use this tool to convey a message in a simple form that is easy for those of all intellect levels to understand. The use of sloganism predates history.
The danger of using sloganism as a means to promote an agenda is that people can simply repeat an idea without thinking it out for themselves. If people actually went through the process of reasoning, they might come to a completely seperate or more precise conclusion. Perhaps, each time they go through the reasoning process they come to a different conclusion. You would almost hope that people have 'open' enough minds to be able to adapt and calibrate to any situation as it presents itself. Perhaps the negative connotation of hypocrisy should change in order for people to feel free to completely change their views on a particular subject. It is this type of citizen, because they do not blindly pledge their allegiance to any cause or group, that is less likely to be manipulated.
The fact is, that if we allow ourselves to repeat slogans or rhetoric we become susceptible to manipulation. Most people will repeat things they hear from those they respect, whether it is their father at the dinner table or the guy that looks like their father on the ten o'clock news. This inborn instinct in us to conform to the 'alpha' members of the group or tribe is actually basic survival. Without the instinct to conform to the 'alpha' members, you would risk being ostracized from the group. Almost certain death would follow, either through violence from the group or banishment into the wild where you could not survive on your own.
One example of the dangers of sloganism is well known in American culture. Everyone I know is aware of the nazi party using 'sloganism' to spread propaganda to the masses, keeping the population from forming ideas for themselves. To quote Hitler, "Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." Sometimes, as a society, we fail to make the connection between sloganism and propaganda. However, anytime we repeat something we've heard without coming to our own conclusions through independent, reliable sources of information we are being manipulated.
The power of sloganism and rhetoric can be seen more clearly when a topic is offered for debate in which they do not exist. It is interesting to see how most individuals won't have an opinion at all and others will try to form an opinion by classifying the topic into a pre-existing argument. For example, if I post something online about popular topics, like healthcare or immigration, everyone will have an opinion. However, if I post something about land reform you can hear the crickets chirping through your flat screen monitor. Notice the difference between truly being 'open-minded' and having 'open-minded' ideas?
We would ultimately like to see the people of our society become independent thinkers. Independent thinkers who don't merely repeat prefabricated talking points. Rather, they actually sit down with an open mind to discuss and share information with one another until a proper conclusion based on the merits of each situation is reached. This is what makes democracy such a strong form of government. The people have the power to calibrate and to make any change neccessary for the society to succeed at any given point. In a mere few months, technology, the economy, or society itself could force such changes. The people have to be 'open' enough to ideas from all over the political spectrum to keep our democracy healthy and strong.
The danger of using sloganism as a means to promote an agenda is that people can simply repeat an idea without thinking it out for themselves. If people actually went through the process of reasoning, they might come to a completely seperate or more precise conclusion. Perhaps, each time they go through the reasoning process they come to a different conclusion. You would almost hope that people have 'open' enough minds to be able to adapt and calibrate to any situation as it presents itself. Perhaps the negative connotation of hypocrisy should change in order for people to feel free to completely change their views on a particular subject. It is this type of citizen, because they do not blindly pledge their allegiance to any cause or group, that is less likely to be manipulated.
The fact is, that if we allow ourselves to repeat slogans or rhetoric we become susceptible to manipulation. Most people will repeat things they hear from those they respect, whether it is their father at the dinner table or the guy that looks like their father on the ten o'clock news. This inborn instinct in us to conform to the 'alpha' members of the group or tribe is actually basic survival. Without the instinct to conform to the 'alpha' members, you would risk being ostracized from the group. Almost certain death would follow, either through violence from the group or banishment into the wild where you could not survive on your own.
One example of the dangers of sloganism is well known in American culture. Everyone I know is aware of the nazi party using 'sloganism' to spread propaganda to the masses, keeping the population from forming ideas for themselves. To quote Hitler, "Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." Sometimes, as a society, we fail to make the connection between sloganism and propaganda. However, anytime we repeat something we've heard without coming to our own conclusions through independent, reliable sources of information we are being manipulated.
The power of sloganism and rhetoric can be seen more clearly when a topic is offered for debate in which they do not exist. It is interesting to see how most individuals won't have an opinion at all and others will try to form an opinion by classifying the topic into a pre-existing argument. For example, if I post something online about popular topics, like healthcare or immigration, everyone will have an opinion. However, if I post something about land reform you can hear the crickets chirping through your flat screen monitor. Notice the difference between truly being 'open-minded' and having 'open-minded' ideas?
We would ultimately like to see the people of our society become independent thinkers. Independent thinkers who don't merely repeat prefabricated talking points. Rather, they actually sit down with an open mind to discuss and share information with one another until a proper conclusion based on the merits of each situation is reached. This is what makes democracy such a strong form of government. The people have the power to calibrate and to make any change neccessary for the society to succeed at any given point. In a mere few months, technology, the economy, or society itself could force such changes. The people have to be 'open' enough to ideas from all over the political spectrum to keep our democracy healthy and strong.
No comments:
Post a Comment