Is propaganda ethical or not?

Xheni Caka
English 102-52

IS PROPAGANDA ETHICAL?

Most people associate the word "propaganda" with Nazi Germany in which it
was used to unify a nation by turning Adolf Hitler into a demigod, by
identifying and demonizing those countries which stood in the way of
Germany fulfilling its destiny, and by scapegoating Jews. The result of all
that propaganda was the destruction of Europe and the death of some 50
million people, so it is not surprising that propaganda has negative
connotations. Propaganda is also used to keep North Korea's dictatorial Kim
family in power by stirring up hatred of the imperialist USA which –
according to the Kim's – is determined to destroy them. Propaganda was also
used to prevent the Soviet Union from fragmenting, also by positioning the
USA as a threat. Yet there are also forms of propaganda that support noble
causes, such as mobilizing the nation in the face of danger, promoting
equal rights for women or racial minorities, and for the sake of improved
public health, to give just a few examples. Some analysts believe the most
effective form of propaganda is the most honest, and that the most
persuasive form of "public diplomacy" uses education and cultural exchanges
to put its message across. Does that make it ethical? Propaganda inhibits
diversity of thought among people, causing them to think in either one
extreme or the other. Secondly, propaganda treats people as means rather
than ends; thus using people as tools to achieve an ulterior motive. Even
the best form of propaganda, I will argue, is a form of deception, a lie,
and therefore propaganda can never be ethical.

Propaganda truly limits diversity and other ways of thinking, while
only allowing a single path or mode of thought. As Jacques Ellul says,
"Each propaganda is by nature totalitarian, and tends to disclaim all
pluralism." (Ellul 1981). The Nazis for instance, used propaganda in order
to limit the thinking of the population and allow only a certain type of
thought while crushing any opposition. As Chris Trueman says, "you could
only read, see and hear what the Nazis wanted you to read, see and hear. In
this way, if you believed what you were told, the Nazi leaders logically
assumed that opposition to their rule would be very small and practiced
only by those on the very extreme who would be easy to catch." (Trueman
2012) Therefore, by controlling what people read, saw, and heard, the Nazis
then were able to understand how people would think and what their next
step would be. As Goebbels explains, propaganda there was used in a way
that it could win people utterly and once they made it, people would be
stuck there and would have no escape way." (Trueman 2012).

Propaganda uses people as a means to an end. Through propaganda
governments and institutions are able to manipulate the minds of people in
order to achieve an ulterior motive of their own without any benefit to the
people themselves. They are used just as a tool to make it to the superior
goal that doesn't actually care of what your tool is. As Goebbels says,
"Propaganda is not an end in itself, but a means to an end. If the means
achieves the end then the means is good" (Trueman 2012). It suppresses
people in a kind of way in a sociological way. Sociological propaganda
produces, as Ellul explains: "a progressive adaptation to a certain order
of things, a certain concept of human relations, which unconsciously molds
individuals and makes them conform to society." (Ellul 1981) When
propaganda is used, there has to be done everything in order to stick to
the golden plan do whatever has been planned to be done after. Propaganda
is used as the fastest way to achieve something. Jay Black tries to
emphasize propaganda and compares it with education and in order to give a
definition, he uses what Everett Martin wrote when he explains this
phenomena : "Education aims at independence of judgment. Propaganda offers
ready-made opinions for the unthinking herd. Education and propaganda are
directly opposed both in aim and method. The educator aims at a slow
process of development; the propagandist, at quick results. The educator
tries to tell people how to think; the propagandist, what to think. The
educator strives to develop individual responsibility; the propagandist,
mass effects. The educator fails unless he achieves an open mind; the
propagandist unless he achieves a closed mind." (Black 2001)

Yet, there are lots of cases where propaganda has been used as a means
to a good end. For instance during the American Revolution, the press was
used as a means to promote the revolution cause. Samuel Adams, one of the
founding fathers of America, published pieces in Boston newspapers that
focused the anti-tax resentment of colonists in the direction of
revolution. This example shows us that there are certain good aspects of
propaganda as well. As Nancy Snow argues, "Propaganda itself is not
inherently negative. Certainly, it has been used for many horrific purposes
throughout history. However, there are also instances in which propaganda
has been used to further positive agendas" (Snow 2010). So it is not
accurate to say that propaganda is used only for negative ends. Also
propaganda itself was firstly used as a good means but the problem is that
when it comes to define it, what comes to people minds, as mentioned
before, is the propaganda of the Nazis, so people generally have a negative
perception of propaganda. This has happened because people now see how it
used everywhere and all the definitions for it imply you such an idea. As
J.C Thompson gives it a definition for instance, he says: "Propaganda is
concerned with the management of opinions and attitudes by the direct
manipulation of social suggestion rather than by altering other conditions
in the environment or in the organism" (Thompson 2008).

But the fact that it has been used also to do good deeds, it doesn't mean
that it is ethical. Hitler himself wrote a book explaining how he used to
deceive people and what he says is that when you have to make propaganda,
you cannot be fair and as he says, "Give only one side of the argument"
(Hitler 1925). He shows his principles of propaganda which leave no space
to doubt that his principles were not ethical. But this is how it works. In
his The Etiques of Propaganda, Jacques Ellul says that propaganda furnishes
man with a criterion for good and evil (Ellul 1981). When different scholar
give ideas on how to propagandize, they never use the word "ethics" and
actually use words that come to an opposite meaning with it. For instance,
J.C. Thompson gives the properties of propaganda and he says: "The
propaganda will evoke emotional responses from the people's own
backgrounds" (Thompson 2008). So it is hard to speak about ethics and moral
when is spoken about propaganda. Ellul says, "There is no morality in the
propaganda game, and therefore it serves no purpose to render a moral
judgment on propaganda. It belongs to one of those closed and impenetrable
areas where ethics loses its rights" (Ellul 1981). When Ellul comes up with
a conclusion about the etiques of propaganda he says: "It appears more and
more that what propaganda builds in man cannot be destroyed by the
experience of facts, contrary to what has been normally believed or falsely
proven. All this leads me to unveil the ethical criteria which I myself use
to underscore the amorality of propaganda" (Ellul 1981).

To sum up, I would like to conclude the idea that propaganda is not
ethical because of the means it uses, how it is used and often even about
the result expected to gain. Propaganda is used mostly to convince the
people to think in a directed and controlled way. It doesn't allow people
to think in a diverse way by making them persuaded in a single idea. Also,
in order for it to result in the desired end, propaganda uses people as
means or tools rather than ends. Even if there are cases where propaganda
is used in order to achieve something that is mainly in the benefits of the
people, this is not enough to say that propaganda is ethical being that it
uses means that are not ethical and not moral. Even by the definitions of
most scholars, it is a way to manipulate people so there is no place for
ethics in propaganda, no matter why it is used for. Propaganda is not the
only mean that can be used to achieve the wanted results. We should achieve
what we have planned in a more educated, moral and ethical way and avoid
using propaganda as much as we can.



Works Cited:

Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. I 1925.





Chris Trueman. History Learning Site, 2012.






Jay Black, Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 2001.







J.C. Thompson, Southern Methodist University Bulletin, August 2008.







Jacques Ellul, Communication, 1981.








Nancy Snow, Huffington Post, March 2010.