should we avoid drawing attention to the horrors of capitalism? Or does our case depend upon exposing them?
- This topic has 13 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
should we avoid drawing attention to the the horrors of capitalism? Or does our case depend upon exposing them? Simple question I think. I ask because I believe my posts are being flagged because they show working class children suffering the effects of the profit system: bullet and bomb damage.
On the other side we have a party video that sounds like a religious call for love peace and cooperation and avoiding the very reasons for revolt. Does the working class need peace?
Should this not be our response to 'peace'
Our case depends on the class struggle. War and child casualties predate capitalism and its not necessarily more profitable to murder children in war anyway. I think there was an article once that explained fear and revulsion is the sort of cheap propaganda used by capitalists to provoke an unthinking emotive reaction. Doesn't mean we have to put a pacifist or call for love and co-operation which I think was the error of the resolution to "put a positive case" when the distinction is not really between negative or positive propaganda but a better one would be between emotional and rational propaganda.
jondwhite wrote:I think there was an article once that explained fear and revulsion is the sort of cheap propaganda used by capitalists to provoke an unthinking emotive reaction.wow, I think Marx and Engels were guilty of the same thing and I think they would revolt at it being called cheap popaganda that children worked down the mines and were distorted and died young. Whatever article you refer to is rubbish. I suggest that instead you re read capital and the communist manifesto.
Actually the most notable Victorian propaganda of this sort was a liberal call for philanthropy such as Barnado's use of images of deprived children.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdom_of_repugnance#CriticismThese days scaring the population into political views is the tactics of the Republican party attack ads or in Britain, David Cameron's comment on Corbyn"The Labour Party is now a threat to our national security, our economic security and your family's security"
jondwhite wrote:Actually the most notable Victorian propaganda of this sort was a liberal call for philanthropy such as Barnado's use of images of deprived children.propaganda of what sort?I have to disagree with you about avoiding talking about and showing images of the horrors of capitalism. I think capitalist pro[aganda suggests there are only a few horrors, the one's they want you to know about.it is for the movement to draw attention to the horrors they don't wish workers to see. It is capitalist propaganda to hide such things. So we tell our fellow workers that poverty is capitalist propaganda and actually thing arent that bad?
What tactic is being deployed by referring to one side of a capitalist war as 'nutters' and drawing attention to the horrors of only one side?Perhaps capitalist propaganda? What should a socialist response be?
Well you could appeal on a variety of bases includingappeal to reason e.g. "you will be better off under the Tories"appeal to good will e.g. "vote Labour for a fairer society"appeal to fear e.g. The Labour Party is now a threat to our national security, our economic security and your family's securityappeal to horror e.g. ISIS propaganda videos, Violence and injury occurs therefore vote for usPersonally I think an appeal to reason is our strongest suit to play and an appeal to horror the weakest and least effective.
and follow the capitalist media and avoid drawing attention to horrors caused by the system we oppose?Why bother challenging capitalism? after all even socialists agree with the capitalists. Wars and hunger don't really exist and if they do well they are not that bad. Hunger doesn't cause misery nor does war?That would indeed be a spooky world cdeEspecially if the 'left' followed suit
What did you think of this at the timehttp://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100211357/the-swps-fanatics-have-outdone-themselves-with-their-margaret-thatcher-is-dead-rejoice-cover/
I don't see how it has anything to do with our discussion.We are obviously misunderstanding one another
As I say -what relevance is this to the OP? Dancing onThatcher's grave in public is not exposing the horrors of capitalism.It is pointless: tho it would appeal to millions; it is not what I am talking about. Please have another look at my question
So is 'drawing the attention to the horrors of capitalism' a moral duty, or the only propaganda we can appeal to, or the most effective?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.