Filem hitam putih dan warna-warni

Salam buat semua.

* AWAS! Satu lagi entri yang panjang dan skema buat kamu. Mintak maaf ya kamu tapi penting bangat untuk kamu tahu.

Di sini, saya berminat untuk berkongsi satu artikel menarik yang dipetik dari akhbar rasmi Wellington, The Dominion Post.

 

Being Economical with the Truth

Adolf Hitler may have been the most evil man that ever lived – but he wasn’t stupid.

In the years immediately following World War I he devoted a great deal of time to fathoming the reasons for Germany’s defeat. Among the most important contributing factors, he quite rightly identified the clear superiority of Allied (especially British) propaganda.

We still have difficulty, even now, 95 years after the outbreak of the Great War, in separating the historical reality of the Anglo-German conflict, from the almost entirely contrived version of events handed down to us by the propagandists of our own side.

According to Hitler’s stern critique, Germany’s propagandists were far too cerebral, and far too enamoured with the truth.

The British propagandists were better, he said, because they directed their messages at the stupidest – not the smartest – of their people, and because they were willing to tell such shocking lies about their enemies.

While serving a five-year prison sentence for insurrection, Hitler reflected on the essentials of effective propaganda:

“The receptivity of the great masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan.

“As soon as you sacrifice this slogan and try to be many-sided, the effect will piddle away, for the crowd can neither digest nor retain the material offered. In this way the result is weakened and in the end entirely cancelled out.”

Of course, Adolf Hitler wasn’t the only person ruminating on how to produce effective propaganda in the 1920s. Across the Atlantic, in New York City, the founder of the modern “science” of public relations, Edward Bernays, had arrived at very similar conclusions to those of the banged-up leader of the Nazi Party.

But, Bernays had two very big advantages over Hitler. First, he had actually been one of the Allies’ leading propagandists during the war; and second, he was the nephew of the founder of psychotherapy, Sigmund Freud.

It was Uncle Ziggy’s professional lock on Western society’s subconscious motivations that gave his nephew’s propaganda campaigns their special edge.

By contrast, Hitler’s understanding of what made good propaganda was wholly intuitive. In the final analysis, however, it made little difference. Be it the work of Aryan superman, or Jewish huckster, the end product looked very much the same.

Why do we need to know all this? Because the techniques pioneered by Britain’s war propagandists, Hitler’s Nazis, and Bernays’ “science” of public relations haven’t really changed all that much in 80 years.

Politicians and big corporations still disseminate the most shocking falsehoods to capture the attention of their audience/ market.

And the endless reiteration of simplistic slogans, directed at the stupidest – not the smartest – citizens/consumers, remains the surest way to imprint their thoughts upon our brains.

On this, Hitler’s intuitions were spot-on.

“Only constant repetition will finally succeed in imprinting an idea on the memory of a crowd.”

And, when you lie, tell big lies. Because it would never enter the heads of the “broad masses” to “fabricate colossal untruths and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously”.

And, above all, never equivocate.

Absolute certainty, says Hitler, is the “very first condition which has to be fulfilled in every kind of propaganda: a systematically one-sided attitude towards every problem that has to be dealt with. When they see an uncompromising onslaught against an adversary, the people have at all times taken this as proof that right is on the side of the active aggressor; but if the aggressor should go only halfway and fail to push home his success, the people will look upon this as a sign that he is uncertain of the justice of his own cause.”

The legacy of this master propagandist is everywhere around us.

The Big Lie: “Climate change is a hoax”; “Globalisation has lifted millions out of poverty”.

Constant Repetition: “John Key has a secret agenda.”

The Systematically One-Sided Attitude: “ACC is bankrupt. It’s all Labour’s fault. Only massive levy increases and a reduction in entitlements can fix it.”

And you thought Hitler was dead.

 

Sumber: Trotter, C. (2009, October 16). Being economical with the truth. The Dominion Post, p.B4.

 

The Century of the Self

Artikel ini telah mengingatkan saya pada satu siri dokumentari Adam Curtis yang bertajuk The Century of the Self. Sedikit sebanyak artikel ini mempunyai kaitan yang besar dengan dokumentari ini. Kalian boleh menontonnya di sini atau juga dari Youtube.

 

Episod 1

Episod 2

Episod 3

Episod 4

 

Berikut merupakan sedikit ringkasan bagi keempat-empat episod siri dokumentari ini (perhatian: ini lebih kepada tagging).

The_Century_of_the_Self(2)

Cuba klik dan save untuk baca. Nota ini mungkin agak kurang jelas. Boleh email saya kalau betul-betul berminat nak baca.

 

Penting ke untuk menonton dokumentari ini?

Ha’ah. Haruslah penting sekali wahai kawan-kawan. Sepanjang keempat-empat episod ini, dua kali saya terdengar pandangan pak cik Edward Bernays tentang orang awam atau orang kebanyakan seperti kita. Menurut anak beliau, Ann Bernays, kita orang awam ini kurang cerdik atau dengan kata yang lebih ekstrim, BODOH. Aduh, sedihnya bila dilabel bodoh ya. Sebab itu perlu tahu tentang teori psychoanalysis ini agar kita boleh kenal diri dan potensi diri dengan lebih baik. Dan juga agar tidak mudah dimanipulasi.

Atau mahukan jalan yang lebih tepat untuk kenal diri sendiri? Teman sekelas saya yang berlainan agama dengan saya bilang hanya ada satu jawapannya.

M.A.K.R.I.F.A.T.

Terkedu saya mendengar beliau menyebut perkataan makrifat. Pandai sungguh beliau ! Kelihatannya hanya ada satu kunci untuk mengenal diri iaitu Makrifatullah. The gnosis of God.

Saya juga mula mengenali siri dokumentari ini setelah direcommendkan oleh seorang teman saya yang lain. Menurut beliau, dokumentari ini adalah barang yang super duper baik punya (Quel travail magnifique !). Tapi perlu juga diingatkan supaya tidak terlalu menerimanya bulat-bulat kerana dikhuatiri terdapat agenda yang tersembunyi di sebalik penghasilan dokumentari ini. Kadang-kadang dokumentari ini kelihatan seperti ingin memupuk Individualism. Eh tetiba pulak kedengaran seperti seorang yang mengkaji teori konspirasi. Hehe. Apapun tontonlah dengan hati yang terbuka memandangkan ada beberapa bahagian dari dokumentari ini yang mungkin tidak sesuai untuk tontonan umum.

Apa yang lebih penting, dokumentari ini sarat dengan maklumat yang saya sendiri belum pernah tahu sebelum ini. Hanya sekadar mengenali nama Freud dalam kelas EDUC sahaja dan kurang pula mesra dengan teori Psychoanalysisnya sebelum ini. Ternyata teori ini yang mungkin mampu menghasilkan kesan yang baik boleh pula menghasilkan kesan yang amat PYSCHO sedunia apabila disalahgunakan. Maka amatlah disarankan untuk menonton kesemua episod dokumentari ini. Sekiranya anda seorang yang minat akan Sosiologi dan Psikologi seperti saya, anda telah membuat pilihan yang tepat dengan menonton dokumentari ini! Selamat menonton bagi yang masih belum menonton !

 

Wahhabism, Salafism and Salafabism

Atas saranan seorang teman, saya telah membatalkan hajat saya untuk membuat sedikit ulasan tentang Wahhabism, Salafism, dan Salafabism di sini (seperti yang ditulis dalam entri yang lepas). Ada sebab yang kukuh untuk itu. Tambahan pula, saya terpaksa melupakan terus hasrat ini disebabkan oleh satu peristiwa yang pernah berlaku dalam kelas Political Islam saya dulu. Sungguh saya tidak bohong! Saya kurang senang sekali dengan PENGLABELAN! Siapa kita untuk melabel atau menilai iman orang? Hebat sangatkah kita? Ok, kita tutup cerita.

Dan dengan itu, saya sediakan bersama, rujukan untuk artikel tersebut yang berkisarkan Wahhabism, Salafism, dan Salafabism ini. Menurut pensyarah saya, artikel ini sangat bagus untuk mereka yang ingin tahu tentang Wahhabism, Salafism, dan Salafabism. Satu bonus lagi yang boleh kita ambil daripada artikel ini ialah Salafabism. Kurang mesra dengan istilah ini? Kali pertama mendengarnya? Maka bolehlah kalian rujuk artikel itu selepas ini. Huhu.

 

Khaled Abou El Fadl (2003). The ugly modern and the modern ugly: Reclaiming the beautiful in Islam. In Omid Safi (Ed.), Progressive Muslims: On Justice, Gender and Pluralism (pp.33-73). Oxford: Oneworld Publications.

 

Kepada warga Welly, buku ini boleh dipinjam dari VUW Library.

Butiran:

Tingkat 3, Central 3 Day Loan, BP161.3P964 (Call number)

Rebut jangan tak rebut!:)

Sekian.

* Believe in wonders. And will always do.


2 thoughts on “Filem hitam putih dan warna-warni

  1. well done diana. u’ve completed your CALL workshop and applied in your real life. something that Edith will be proud of 😉

    boh,. hebatnye boh, ge wat asgmnt sy tengok. malah lebih hebat!!! teruskan🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s