When looking at the current American Propaganda System, you should look closely at the media outlets that distribute the twisted, agenda-driven garbage that barely passes for real information. It’s function is to unapologetically manufacture our consent to be ruled by the current oppressive ruling class. And yes, when I use the idea of “manufacturing consent,” I am borrowing a concept/term used by the Nobel Prize winning linguist Noam Chomsky. Back in 1988 he co-authored a book that is described by Wikipedia below.
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (1988), by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky, proposes that the mass communication media of the U.S. “are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion”, by means of the propaganda model of communication. The title of the book, Manufacturing Consent, derives from the phrase “the manufacture of consent,” employed in the book Public Opinion (1922), by Walter Lippmann (1889–1974).
My take on this is that our propaganda outlets which are also called media outlets (news outlets, movies, radio, crony capitalist commercial ads, etc), distribute information in such a way that they “manufacture” attitudes, emotions, and propensities to certain behaviors in our consciousness. By identifying and understanding these manufactured-in-our-minds propensities, we can get an idea of the minds of those that currently rule us and construct a model of their social and political agenda. After all, even Princeton University back in 2014 suggested that the United States lives under an oligarchy, so why not try to define who our current rulers are since a small group of powerful individuals now set the American political and social agenda. In certain past centuries, it was easier to identify the ruling class. During the age of kings in Europe, the king and the aristocracy were easily recognizable, and their power was absolute. Most people back then could probably identify the exact individuals that were oppressing them. Today, the ruling class hides in the shadows. To help us understand the current political and social agenda of those who rule us now, we can look at one of the things our American Propaganda System encourages which is to look at ‘who we aren’t supposed to criticize.”
Who You Better Not Criticize
It was Voltaire who said, “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” For those in the past who lived under a monarchy, they knew that if they publically criticized their king or some powerful aristocrat, they could end up in the torture chamber, publically flogged, or even killed. Whatever the consequences, it would never have been a good thing to openly criticize a king, the nobility, or any of their cronies. Of course, the aristocracy was at times divided into different factions vying for more power and wealth, so those being ruled had to try to learn the particular idiosyncricies of their local ruler to avoid punishment. One of the differences between the aristocracy or nobility in 1716 and our current aristocracy or ruling class in 2016 is that it behooved the nobility in 1716 to be openly recognized by those that they ruled, while the ruling class or modern day aristocracy in 2016 seeks to rule while hidden, protected, and unrecognizable as rulers in the shadows. As in 1716, the ruling aristocracy in 2016 is divided into various factions vying for wealth and power. We can begin to understand the social and political agenda of our modern day aristocrats or rulers who exercise their aristocratic power in the shadows by looking at who we aren’t supposed to criticize to avoid social, politcal, and economic punishment. When we learn who we can’t criticize, we learn what is in the best interests of those who rule us.
You Better Not Criticize Women
Another Presidential campaign is in full swing, and Donald Trump committed the anti-ruling-class political sin of publically criticizing a woman in the Summer of 2015. He criticized another presidential candidate who is a woman, Carly Fiorina, when he said, “Look at that face! Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?!” It is just fine to criticize male presidential candidates. Trump can have his hair criticized and publically be called arrogant and misogynistic, and Jeb Bush can be called a low-energy, lackluster, candidate, but you better be careful about what you say about a woman. The political fallout from Trump’s remarks about Fiorina was such that Trump started making it a point to say that he “cherishes” women. I don’t hear anyone publically saying that they cherish men.
Don’t Criticize The Feminist Gynocracy
On October 2, 2015, Chris Harper Mercer shot and killed 10 people and wounded several others at Umpqua Community College in Oregon. He was obviously part of the growing numbers of marginalized men in the United States. These men are marginalized socially, mentally, politically, and economically because their urgent legitimate needs are ignored by a feminist, gynocentrism-focused society. For example, 80 to 90 percent of the homeless are men. Many of these homeless are military veterans who risked their lives for their country, but the stories and needs of these marinalized men are greatlly ignored by the propaganda media and misandrous government in the USA. The American Propaganda System openly uses censorship to prevent the public discussion of the urgent needs of marginalized men. Yes, what Chris Harper Mercer did was horrible and inhuman. Violence is not the solution, but ignoring the needs of the growing numbers of marinalized men in the USA is also not the solution to preventing the slaughter of innocent people in the future. One of the propagandized solutions being shoved down the throats of Americans is that we need more gun laws. The problem is that a thousand more gun laws won’t stop the growth of marginalized men who turn to violence in the gynocentrism-focused USA. Those that rule us know that if we start talking about the growing numbers of marinalized men in the USA, we will have to talk about the major causes driving that growth. One source of male marginalization is radical feminist ideology in all of our societal and governmental institutions which creates a Feminist Gynocracy with government policies that marginalizes men. Societal misandry also adds to the marginalization of men. Openly recognizing the Feminist Gynocracy and societal misandry would invite negative criticism of feminism, and our current rulers resist any criticism of radical feminism or FemiNazism as it is called in some men’s rights blogs. In 1945 the Allied armies saved Germany from Nazism, but who will save men and boys from FemiNazism?
Follow The Money
Why would those who rule us fight any CRITICISM that goes against the support of a radical feminist society? Why would anyone support such a society that promotes social chaos, marginalizes men, causes a high divorce rate, a high percentage of fatherless homes, neighborhoods filled with gang violence, and increases governmental control over its citizens? Well, to use an old saying, “follow the money.” Here are two examples. Divorce doubles the number of households that crony capitalists can sell products to thus increasing their weatlh. Promoting so-called women’s rights and government programs for women are just more excuses for more laws and more taxes that increase government wealth and power to CONTROL its citizens. Obviously, a gynocracy is in the best interests of those who rule us. It is a well known fact that women now control the majority of wealth in the anti-male USA.
If you don’t believe being ruled by a gynocracy can result in societal chaos. look at some of our African-American neighborhoods and cities. Detroit, Ferguson, West Oakland and Richmond, California are predominantly African-American areas suffering from illegal drugs, gang violence, fatherless homes, high unemployment, high murder rates, high crime rates, lack of educational acheivement, and other social ills. Go online and verify it yourself. We’ve all heard the American propaganda outlets mention these things from time to time. What our American Propaganda system won’t discuss is the connection between who rules the social and cultural context of these Black areas and the resulting social chaos. Because of the breakup of the Black family, women now rule the social milieu of Black society. Two major historical processes broke up the majority of Black families in the United States – slavery, and the replacement of Black fathers in Black families with the modern Welfare State. An author, Star Parker an African-American, has an interesting name for her website which is UncleSamsPlantation.com. The name of the website and the website content all point to the fact that the modern Welfare State for Blacks just perpetuates the breakup of Black families just as it did in the time of slavery on the plantation. The break up of the Black family and the government’s laws empowering Black women to be the economic and social lords of the Black family and thus Black society has resulted in the horrible rampant social chaos we see today in African-American communities. Most African-American communities are ruled by a Black Gynocracy backed up by the modern Welfare State, and the results can be seen in the horrible social chaos in Black communities.
Finally, the American Propaganda System serves many other functions besides stamping out any criticism of what is in the best interests of those who rule us, but to describe those other functions would be a big undertaking requiring several books. One thing is for sure. The American Propaganda System currently doesn’t want to even mention anything about the Men’s Human Rights Movement. It just isn’t profitable.