Who wrote this?
[I]n the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.
I proffer this for your attention because of this.
3 comments:
Interesting though, the context of the statement was his adversaries (Jews and Marxists) used the big lie while he spoke the truth which in his delusion was the core of his struggle.
Yes, that's very Rovian is it not? Newt Gingrich recently said something to the effect that "Democrats lie more effectively than we tell the truth."
Goebbels is often credited with the "Big Lie" concept, but in fact when he said it he was talking about what the English were saying about the Nazis.
The lies - blatant untruths - of Romney + Ryan are something to behold, unprecedented imho (post ww2 for what I know about..) What is weird as well is audience reaction (on the few you tubies I have watched), it has a scripted quality, automatic quality. There is a sort of mindless fervor. Cult like.
The post about the pope’s blood *yecch* did make me think though that a world where the mystical, the supernatural, the other-worldly, some view of luck and fate (from good luck charms to astrology to adherence to monotheistic religions) are mostly divorced from real-world matters (such as tides, bacteria, cancer, transport, unemployment stats, tax intake in a year, etc.) is really slipping away in the US.
Traditionally, in the US, as seen from the EU, there is some *interference* of religious attitudes into ‘health’ (abortion, stem cell research, vaccines..) and other areas as well, but it is influence that can be tracked, and of course exists in different forms in other places as well, even if say it is called ‘bio-ethics’ or ‘common sense’, relying on pragmatic arguments. Typical ex: GB’s ban on assisted suicide, CH’s rules on egg harvesting, etc.
But for national, public space politics to fall into such total disregard for simple, known, consensual facts?
Note the Ryan-Romney discourse is not just rah-rah nationalism or in-group-ism, nor are appeals to the supernatural present, as is historically common for many politicians world over. It is the presentation of an alternate reality solidly rooted in the secular world. (Another point is that WAR is absent, too.)
By the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise. - Hitler.
Ana
Post a Comment