Madmen

Mad men

I don´t watch a lot of TV dramas. Recently some friends of mine tried to convince me that I had to see a program called "Madmen." They said it had brilliant writing and brilliant acting. I asked about the premise and they explained that it had to do with a 1960s New York advertising director on Madison Avenue who struggles with the high pressure life of being a corporate ad-man while maintaining a wife and family. Smoking, drinking martinis, benzedrene, cut-throat ad campaigns.

I couldn't watch more than a few minutes. I got it. In fact the program fell short. I grew up as the son of a New York advertising director in the 1960s. He worked at N.W. Ayers and Sons on 5th Avenue creating slogans like "Is it true blondes have more fun?" for Breck Shampoo.


The witty parody of men in grey flannel suits creating products that no one needs and pitching them to people through TV commercials was the story of my step-father's life.  

Now the advertising industry has morphed. Ads and commercials are everywhere, cajoling and seducing us into feeling comfortable about living in a consumer society. 

Back in the 1960s people still re-used things. We didn't spend hours glued to a screen. I'm sure you've all heard your parents say these things.  But somewhere between then and now the simple propaganda techniques of silly jingles and slogans have transformed into complete brainwashing.

Brainwashing is a serious word. Noam Chomsky is more generous: he calls it the "Manufacturing of Consent." If government rules by the consent of the people as Rousseau had it, then consent must be created. 

How could anyone vote for a monster for president? It's interesting to see how people are manipulated. As a case in point take the media coverage of political news in the United States.

First the name is mentioned again and again. We grow used to hearing the name of the brand repeated and repeated. Then we take interest in the scandal of the day. All publicity is good because it promotes name recognition. We laugh along with the latest gaffe or ridiculous comment. But soon sympathy is created. We feel sorry for the buffoon. What does he need to win? we are asked again and again. Soon we are told the monster is becoming a phenomenon. 

In Mexico, where democracy is hardly a byword, such free publicity for a political candidate is illegal. You cannot go on mentioning one candidate to the exclusion of others without being accused of political promotion. But CNN tells us "People want to hear this story. It's our duty to get it out. We are only the postman." And so they continue the drumbeat.

Bit by bit we grow accustomed to hearing the name of the candidate and feel cheated if there's no new scandal.  Then we are told he has been legitimized, he's "mainstream." In fact it is political suicide to cast a vote for the other candidate since he "can't win,"  and so is "not viable." This follows Alexander Pope's logic on vice: we first "endure, then pity, then embrace." While a candidate may appear to be a buffoon, he is patriotic and we have a terrorist challenge. When told that he is our only hope for "keeping our borders safe" we must vote for him. In the end we vote for the buffoon, hoping he is no worse than the last buffoon. It is after all, "the lesser of two evils."

Such things as poverty, education, and infrastructure are not even news stories.  No interest is taken in the real daily life of the citizens of the country. No real debate was ever held. What little enthusiasm anyone had for "change" was poisoned by all the scandal.

How else can we explain the dictators and  democractially elected monsters? The propaganda techniques born in the age of Madmen and perfected throughout the electronic and internet age have borne fruit. 

How does nationalism become a norm? In the days of the Soviet Union and the Cold War, great emphasis was given to movie-making as the supreme propaganda form. But what happens if propaganda is ignored? How can brainwashing be effective if the advertising isn't seen?

In his seminal work "Propaganda" social critic Jacques Ellul pointed out that written propaganda only works if people can read. TV propaganda only works if everyone has a TV. That's why the Mexican government gave out millions of free TVs last year: so that even illiterate people living in rural poverty can tune into the government message. 

Of course, just as the Madmen of the 60s began the TV age, TV itself is an old media form. That's why it's important for governments now to crack down on the internet even as free wifi becomes available everywhere.

Internet censorship? How is it possible? A new anti-terrorist law recently passed in Russia and signed by the President makes it illegal to promote religious beliefs online.  Only registered organizations with the proper papers can practice preaching. This makes it possible to trace anyone who tries to convert others.

Here's a summary of the new Russian "anti-terrorism" law http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2016/july/russia-ban-evangelism-effect.html

from Christianity Today:

Yesterday, Russia’s new anti-terrorism laws, which restrict Christians from evangelizing outside of their churches, went into effect.

The “Yarovaya package” requires missionaries to have permits, makes house churches illegal, and limits religious activity to registered church buildings, among other restrictions. Individuals who disobey could be fined up to $780, while organizations could be fined more than $15,000.

Forum 18 offers an analysis of the laws and their ramifications for Protestants and other non-Orthodox believers. World Watch Monitor compiled the worried reactions of Russian evangelical leaders and concerned observers.

The new laws will “create conditions for the repression of all Christians,” wrote Russia’s Baptist Council of Churches in an open letter. “Any person who mentions their religious view or reflections out loud or puts them in writing, without the relevant documents, could be accused of ‘illegal missionary activity.’”

Requiring a permit to evangelize is “not only absurd and offensive, but also creates the basis for mass persecution of believers for violating these provisions,” read another open letter signed by Protestant Churches of Russia leader Sergei Ryakhovsky among other signatories. The law is “the most draconian anti-religion bill to be proposed in Russia since Nikita Khrushchev promised to eliminate Christianity in the Soviet Union.”

Of course, you may not believe this or give it much credibility since my blog is not a major media outlet. So here's "The Guardian" newspaper from London: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/26/russia-passes-big-brother-anti-terror-laws

Making stories unimportant is another strategy by which messages are censored. When a story is ignored or unreported they are less credible even when reported. On the other hand when something is repeated over and over again it automatically becomes important. This was the point made by Goebbels, Hitler's propaganda minister when he spoke of repeating "The Big Lie." “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

So, I am not a fan of "Madmen." Expertise in telling lies is not a virtue, while honesty is no vice.  On the other hand there is something to be said for "living off the grid." Who  are the real "Mad men?"

कामस्य नेन्द्रिय-प्रीतिर्

लाभो जीवेत यावता

जीवस्य तत्त्व-जिज्ञासा

नार्थो यश् चेह कर्मभिः

TEXT 10

kāmasya nendriya-prītir

lābho jīveta yāvatā

jīvasya tattva-jijñāsā

nārtho yaś ceha karmabhiḥ

SYNONYMS

kāmasya—of desires; na—not; indriya—senses; prītiḥ—satisfaction; lābhaḥ—gain; jīveta—self-preservation; yāvatā—so much so; jīvasya—of the living being; tattva—the Absolute Truth; jijñāsā—inquiries; na—not; arthaḥ—end; yaḥ ca iha—whatsoever else; karmabhiḥ—by occupational activities.

TRANSLATION

Life's desires should never be directed toward sense gratification. One should desire only a healthy life, or self-preservation, since a human being is meant for inquiry about the Absolute Truth. Nothing else should be the goal of one's works.

PURPORT

The completely bewildered material civilization is wrongly directed towards the fulfillment of desires in sense gratification. In such civilization, in all spheres of life, the ultimate end is sense gratification. In politics, social service, altruism, philanthropy and ultimately in religion or even in salvation, the very same tint of sense gratification is ever-increasingly predominant. In the political field the leaders of men fight with one another to fulfill their personal sense gratification. The voters adore the so-called leaders only when they promise sense gratification. As soon as the voters are dissatisfied in their own sense satisfaction, they dethrone the leaders, The leaders must always disappoint the voters by not satisfying their senses. The same is applicable in all other fields; no one is serious about the problems of life. Even those who are on the path of salvation desire to become one with the Absolute Truth and desire to commit spiritual suicide for sense gratification. But the Bhāgavatam says that one should not live for sense gratification.