25 Rules of Propaganda
1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.
Regardless of what you know,
don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news
anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have
to deal with the issues.
2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and
instead focus on side issues
which can be used to show the topic as being critical of some otherwise
sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the "How dare you!"
3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid
discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue
or evidence, as mere rumors and
wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of
truth may work as well. This method works especially well with a silent
press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are
through such "arguable rumors". If you can associate the material with
the Internet, use this fact to certify it a "wild rumor" which can have
no basis in fact.
4. Use a straw man. Find or
create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can
easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to
look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on
your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or
select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their
significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the
charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion
of the real issues.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name
calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary "attack
the messenger" ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that
approach. Associate opponents
with unpopular titles such as "kooks", "right-wing", "liberal",
"left-wing", "terrorists", "conspiracy buffs", "radicals", "militia",
"racists", "religious fanatics", "sexual deviates", and so forth. This
makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label,
and you avoid dealing with
6. Hit and Run. In any public
forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and
then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply
ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and
letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new
identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism
reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing
issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would
dignify the opponent's viewpoint.
7. Question motives.
Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the
opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This
avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8. Invoke authority.
Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your
argument with enough "jargon" and "minutiae" to illustrate you are "one
who knows", and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or
demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
9. Play Dumb. No matter
what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues by
denial that they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any
proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix
well for maximum effect.
10. Associate opponent charges
with old news. A derivative of the straw man usually, in any
large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early
on which can be or were already easily dealt with. Where it can be
foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt
with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent
charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually
then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply
being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the
better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or
element of the facts, take the
"high road" and "confess" with candor that some innocent mistake, in
hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity
to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities
which, "just isn't so." Others can reinforce this on
your behalf, later. Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect
for "coming clean" and "owning up" to your mistakes without addressing
more serious issues.
12. Enigmas have no solution.
Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and
the multitude of players and events,
paint the entire affair as too
complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the
matter to begin to loose interest more quickly without having to address
the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic.
Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with an
apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual material
14. Demand complete solutions.
Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand
completely, a ploy which works best for items qualifying for rule
15. Fit the facts to alternate
conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was
planned with contingency conclusions in place.
16. Vanishing evidence and
witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't
have to address the issue.
17. Change the subject.
Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a
way to side-track the discussion
with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to
a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with
companions who can't argue" with you over the new topic and polarize the
discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize,
and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and
taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will
tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally
render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid
discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional
response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then
focusing on how "sensitive they are to criticism".
19. Ignore proof presented,
demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the "play
dumb" rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent
in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is
impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his
disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed
or withheld, such as a murder weapon). In order to completely avoid
discussing issues may require you to
categorically deny and be
critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses
are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other
authorities have any meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence.
Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and
manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful tools to
neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when
the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts
cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special
Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body.
Subvert the (process) to your
benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues
without open discussion.
Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when
properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it
can ensure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence
is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable
verdict (usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent,
but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a
victim) is achieved, the matter can be considered "officially closed".
22. Manufacture a new truth.
Create your own expert(s), group(s),author(s), leader(s) or influence
existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative,
or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way,
if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
23. Create bigger distractions.
If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive
issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such
as trials, create bigger news
stories (or treat them as such)
to distract the multitudes.
24. Silence critics. If
the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from
circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address
issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and
detention, blackmail or
destruction of their character by release of blackmail information,
or merely by proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats.
25. Vanish. If
you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated
and you think the heat is
getting too hot, to avoid the issues vacate the kitchen. If you
don't, somebody in your organization may choose to vanish you instead.
Courtesy of: Larry Parker