Search This Blog

Above: Lake Geneva, Switzerland. At Montreux.

Fodderize v.t. 1. To break down individual components; to make fungible; to disregard difference; to render one easily substituted for another 2. To impose sub-quality goods or services upon, with little recourse 3. To cap role choices, hinder access to resources regardless of merit, and so avoid competition 4. To manage perception by propaganda-spin techniques, while concealing dispositive facts 5. To manipulate, lure, exploit, deceive

Translate

Wednesday, June 25, 2008

Persuasion Recap: A How-To Manual. Implementing Groupthink. The Dogma-Driven Life

Groupthink:
Techniques that Sway.

You, Too, Can Teach Your Group To Jump Through Hoops.

The Dogma-Driven Life



A. Groupthink. Faulty group thinking that considers few alternatives, has selective information-gathering methods, avoids seeking expert assistance, has inadequate backup plans, all this and more at ://www.abacon.com/commstudies/groups/groupthink.html

Groupthink is group behavior stemming from collective consensus, but under pressure. There is usually a companion issue of threat to dissenters, exclusion, overwhelm. This combination fosters uncritical adoption of ideas, and the sense of cohesion among members of the group.

Engagers in Groupthink come to see themselves as highly moral, and others flawed ://www.cedu.niu.edu/~fulmer/groupthink.htm; ://www.abacon.com/commstudies/groups/groupthink.html. And that supremacism, monopoly on the right, is never challenged in the group.

See a consequence of Groupthink in World War II - the Nuremberg trials - at ://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/nuremberg/nuremberg.htm. See it in action in film.  FN 1.  Know what you are talking about if you hear "Hitler".

Stadium at Nuremberg, Germany, behind the Nazi Documentation Center there. Groupthink Central.

How can people preserve the right to independent information, assessment and decision-making, when others are pushing the group in a rave-wave as though any investigation into merit is unnecessary, and undesirable.

Success of Groupthink is a combination of  
  • methodology and  
  • driven leaders and 
  • people wanting to be fed, not to have to question. 
Watch someone try to counter the Groupthink's dogma. The process is highly effective once someone is in and identifies with an audience of the faithful. In the civil area, like at some religious group meetings, think of The Saddlebacks. The conclusion to any questions asked is already there - just get in line and parrot it back. The dogma-driven life.
In governments and aggression and politics - still the dogma-driven life - but the partisan edge carries the weight of immediate punishment legislatively for dissenters. The party identity as a source of personal power supersedes even own self interest, if one's own economic position will indeed be the worse for staying with the party. Then again, one's identity may well be more important than a common good. No easy answers.

B. The Big Eight Characteristics of Groups that Thrive Because of Groupthink Behaviors:

See the abacom.com site- www.abacon.com/commstudies/groups/groupthink.html. This discussion focuses on political groupthink, governmental movements as exemplified by Nazi Germany and Nuremberg. In less drastic ways, the process is similar to ongoing politics, religious proseletyzing, social views.

It is important to remember the extreme successes that Groupthink offers, to see what indeed can and did happen. What are the little seeds are out there now.  Abacom highlights these characteristics:

1. Invulnerability. The Group sees itself as invulnerable, ignore peril, will undertake great risks for the cause, extreme optimism about outcome.

2. Rationalization. The Group rationalizes collectively why the group is right, and discredit dissenters within or opponents on the outside.

Groupthink. Demonize the opposition. Angelify thyself.

3. Self-satisfaction. The Group sees self as moral, and promotes its members in ignoring or spinning the ethical consequences of decisions as to others.

4. Poisoning. The Group constructs and spreads negative stereotypes to describe opponents, competitors

5. Pressuring. The Group pressures members to conform

6. Self-censorship. The Group members internalize their concerns, do not express own criticisms of group and process

7. Spin. The Group leaders promote an illusion of unanimous agreement; the members do not question; silence is consent

8. Thought-Monitoring. The Group develops thought-guardians, patrollers of subgroups and individuals, that to seek out and counter or block adverse information, that might otherwise cause members to question group goals and methods.

C. How can an Individualist, who believes in that, Avoid Groupthink.

Take adequate time, cross-fertilize, critique, reassess. Go again to ://www.abacon.com/commstudies/groups/groupthink.html

Participate in a network of interacting policy groups. Going it alone is risky.  One group reports back to another group for critique. Groupthink does not do that.  Groupthink lays out the dogma.  An individualist banding with other individualists needs impartial people in charge, leading discussions, investigations. Individualists need to vet, explore outside experts, and engage in a system of "devil's advocacy" - exploring difficult questions of alternatives. Then, before individualists commit to an action, have a "last chance" review to be sure there is not a better way.

If you are a leader or member of any group, and want to avoid Groupthink, and value ongoing individual access to information, assessment and decision-making, go to www.abacon.com/commstudies/groups/groupthink.html.

If, however, you want your group to "groupthink" as a verb, then you will learn from the "what to avoid" list, do those things instead, and promote the Big Eight Groupthink Behaviors up there

D.  How Propaganda Methods Promote Groupthink: 

How did the Nazis Launch and Implement their Groupthink.  How could ideas like that succeed?

These topics are based on G. Stark's Moderne politische Propaganda, our summary of details on that site, identified as a 23-page propaganda pamphlet, contained in the German Propaganda Archive 1930. This is from Calvin College, Grand Rapids, MI. ://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/stark.htm.

This reads like a contemporary political advertising course for advertisers, sales pushers.

1.  Groupthink Approach: Tailor the message. Know your audience, the differences in mindsets, in cities from rural areas. What works in one setting, may not in the other.

Individualist Geezer, not necessarily outdone by Organized, Mechanized Groupthinkers

Rural areas (remember we are referring to materals from that abacom.com site) can absorb more fundamental, straight-talk approaches; if they stay to listen, they might consider.  Cities may require subtlety. Persuade obliquely. Is that so?  Both settings benefit from use of local media, with local persons conveying the message, promoting community calendars, events.

2. Groupthink effort.  Sustain, focus the effort. There are similar focusing techniques used in selling products for commerce and profit. But those are seen as transient interests. Selling ideology requires dedication, the gradual but systematic "enlightenment" campaign, for a changed worldview, not just a purchase.

3. Groupthink Organization; Promote, Promote, Promote. Unify the effort, set up regions, each with central apparatus, each with identified persons in charge, each to set up smaller, local groups.  That happened in our own town recently, with one group wanting a big budget allocation suddenly morphing their efforts into parades, news releases, T-shirts, kids parroting "we need to win this" - and the other town priorities ignored.

Promote individual contacts, at homes, visuals in the community. Local persons reaching local persons through spoken words, study groups, speakers' bureaus.

Hold educational and discussion meetings to assess issues, progress, target areas, build enthusiasm from meeting to meeting, setting themes for meetings from current scandals or sensational events that can be promoted in just a few words, in order to draw the indifferent.

4.  Groupthink Administrators: stay directly involved. Attend gatherings of like-minded people, also to monitor their commitment. Engage in shows of support by promoting local cultural events and demonstrations.  Be seen. Say you have a phone number, then - oops - message box full.  Meanwhile, keep demonizing.

Groupthink wants, in effect, to put The Others on Trains and ship them out. Here, Jasenovac, Croatia. 

5.  Groupthink Programming. Manage dissenters, provide "witnesses" to the advantages of the message, include opportunities for audience responses with slogans

Materials. Written materials include pithy stickers, easily applied anywhere and often, and hard to remove, as constant reminders of the message. Or the equivalent of that kind of mass communication with little effort.  Hard to believe all this stems from WWII era, but there we are. Forgetting history again.

Who cares where the Trains of others go? Here, Theresienstadt CZ.

Keep the momentum going.  Slogans and points simple and memorable. Cartoons for ridicule work well. Vary the text type and size to hold attention; sideline individual thought.

Flyers? Those were found to be of limited use if just handed out - often thrown away. So leave them in places where people go, rather than distributing by street-handouts. Leave individual copies at random in public places for others to see. Offer trial subscriptions to periodicals. Distribute periodicals to places of business, and ask for them if not seen readily.

6.  Groupthink promoters blend in. When distributing, wear ordinary people clothes, no uniforms, ordinary "regular person" address, no formal identification as to affiliation; and time the distribution with good opportunity for the recipient to actually review it soon after receiving.

Transparency? Never.  Never let on who you are, what your real goals are.

7. Groupthinkers promote efficiency. Centralize producing materials and distributing - the effectiveness and economy of the "fan-out" technique - one effort from the top becomes widely distributed by those in the system.  Like in our town, with the special interest budget overwhelming everybody else.

Groupthink kills some of the most creative, educated, among us.  Here, Auschwitz ovens. Think also Crusades, expulsion of minorities.

.8.  Groupthinkers create interest. Spark interest first, raise unanswered questions, then answer the question - (see Burma-Shave?). Example, fair use modification:

a. You lack Drive!
(says the sign:  what?)

b. You soon will have Drive.
(the corner of your eye picks this up.  What on earth?)

c. Tomorrow you will have Drive.  
(now you respond - with that, they have you. This I gotta see)

d. Drive. The daily evening (online) newspaper.  
(Yes! say you, now hooked.  I want one!)

How does this work:

Groupthinkers take little steps. These are small things each. There is a cumulative effect of those little steps, sliding the message into every nook where people would look without thinking, until finally, the culminations began, the mass rallies, the Groupthink.

Hitler was a master at it. But be careful with that reference. We have to separate out the techniques from the man, because it is too easy to dismiss and discredit the man because of his extremes. The techniques are all around us, however.

Ultimate demonization. Montenegro memorial, firing squad, WWII.

Then ask: Are extremes even for us that far away if we ignore the techniques that persuade people to accept what is happening. Torture a problem? Nah. What we do is not torture. And they deserve it. You need it....

You look. Look at some materials. Are any of these little steps helping to persuade you, of things that just maybe you would reject if it were presented outright.

D. Graduates of Groupthink School. Have professional Groupthink spreaders, or very good amateurs, spread into groups we know?

Look at national and international prominent social and religious policy makers and promoters, talking heads, Swiftboaters, administration officials state and federal, and perhaps leading or otherwise in your own place of worship, or monopolizing the once-diverse coffee shop.

Where there is a group, there shall be vulnerability to groupthink also.

E. History, current events, American Culture. Does Groupthink help explain spreads of religions, political or social belief systems.

How about the success of propaganda methods, forms of government, whether a culture gravitates toward patriarchy vs. matriarchy, and which values each system may promote. Is Groupthink behind gender biases, any other -ism or -anti.

Is Groupthink involved at the FLDS ranch? See general encyclopedia-type overview at://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalist_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter_Day_Saints. Is it ticking behind any other group that sets itself apart, with mantras that others are inferior in thinking or attributes. For a look at Groupthink's role in evolving patriarchy so that it becomes inseparable from religion itself, see Martin Luther's Stove, Third Disobedience, Patriarchy, If It Was.

..................................................................
Source: From 1930.

This vastly reduced summation is from that Calvin College sits, a partial translation of the 1930 materials at ://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/stark.htm.

Memorial stones, BuchenwaldGo there for the full text. At that calvin.edu site, click on the home page for other Pre-1933 materials, 1933-45 materials including texts of speeches, and also East German Marxist propaganda 1949-1989.

Other sites: Propaganda leaflets at ://members.home.nl/ww2propaganda/wastue.htm; translation methods and purposes at ://www.londonmet.ac.uk/depts/hal/ug/applied-translation/la2001c-week-2-translation-method/home.cfm

The "innocent" look of the Propagandist

Now go a step further: Is it true that Groupthink only apply to groups we don't like, people whose techniques work well against us, or that we don't agree with, not to ourselves. It can't possibly explain why we believe what we believe.

Fie! Fie! See ://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19990802

FN 1. Films. Movies, Photography, Document Groupthink in action.

1. Triumph of the Will, Leni Reifenstahl's 1934 film of Hitler's rise, including footage of rallies at this stadium, at ://www.pbs.org/wgbh/cultureshock/provocations/leni/3.html; more at ://www.riefenstahl.org/director/1935/; and at ://history.sandiego.edu/gen/filmnotes/triumph.html. View the whole film.

2. Judgment at Nuremberg, 1961, starring Spencer Tracy, Marlene Dietrich, Judy Garland, Burt Lancaster, Montgomery Clift. The topic of Hitler's rise and fall and the war crimes was that riveting. Catch 6 minutes of the verdict here - ://www.rottentomatoes.com/movie-1011299/. At least the topic is being discussed on YouTube.

Groupthink and propaganda. Formula for success. History's troupthink and its results.  Does individualism have a chance. Extremism in politics.  It depends on Groupthink. History's Groupthink.  Groupthink promotes persuasion. Think the end-result.

Thursday, June 19, 2008

Prestigious Award to The Cormorant Group

For immediate release:



FN News Services. The Cormorant Group, umbrella organization fostering various photo-comment internet sites, is proud to announce its receipt of the National Creative Variety Award for 2008. The award is granted annually to that member of the recreational and informal media network whose work demonstrates a high commitment to community education, analysis, diversion and artistic achievement. The Group, through its spokesperson, accepted the coveted award at an honorary dinner near Hartford, CT on June 17, 2008.



The Cormorant Group maintains several photo-illustration comment-narrative sites focusing on travel, politics, culture, arts, and history. The Cormorant Group looks forward to further expansion into areas of biography and creative writing, small play genres, poetry forms and other experiments. Current internet work as to travel and current events include Europe Road Ways, improvised road trips; Hello, Fodder, Hello, Buyer, manual for disposable people; Joy of Equivocating , uses and abuses of obfuscation; and PoseJuxta, uniparty planks.



= FN

Monday, June 16, 2008

Foreign News Clarifying Ours - GOP Supports Full Disclosure

Foreign Policy Surprise

The BBC, British Broadcasting Corporation, tells us that the GOP has adopted the principle of transparency, and supports full disclosure. That is welcome news, yet has not been well reported here.

The BBC article reports that Congressman Joe Barton, Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, demands full disclosure of all facts underlying conclusions that global warming is real and immediately pressing as an issue. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4693855.stm.

Note that the GOP, the Republicans, support this effort 100%. To date, "disclosure" has only been espoused when expedient.

We approve this wedge into common sense. If our GOP supports full disclosure in foreign policy there, in Britain, it must support it here or flip-flop. Thank you, Joe Barton. See ://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Barton. Go, Joe!

Go, GOP. Now, once that is said aloud, will we need to renounce it in the morning, lest someone take it out of context.

Proposal: Take this GOP position on foreign policy to the next level. With clear GOP support of transparency in matters where people are to make decisions, legislate it. Apply full disclosure to candidacies: each candidate to engage in pre-emptive disclosures, to save everyone time and money, and reduce the time we have to listen to pundits. Everyone would disclose laundry and inconsistencies before the pundits find it and rouse themselves.

Pundit, Practicing Outrage at Home

Would this persuade the pundits to return to commentary on established facts. That would be useful, and serve as a welcome shift from shallow entertainment, the convoluted trap, and trumped up shock.

The GOP clearly would support this foreign policy plank, since - if you missed the point here - they are already on record in Great Britain as seeking full disclosure themselves: See PoseJuxta, Planks for People, Pre-Emptive Disclosure Week.




Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Benefits of The Foreign Bellwether - Foreign News More Dependable Guide

Checking Out the Bellwether



Where do you go when the trust is gone?



Privatization and Special Interest Control of News



I. We. Like Sheep.



Travel in retrograde motion for a while, to an area of study that used to be as down home familiar as apple pie. Sheep, and whether and when and how to herd.



The shepherd will arrange for a Bellwether. This is a ram, known as a wether in this role (usually fixed) with a bell around its neck, and the sheep learn to follow the sound of the bell as they graze around. Just as the herder intended. Saves him running around, the sheep don't have to think, and everyone is reasonably happy.


II. The Modern People Bellwether.



This used to be someone like Walter Cronkite. When he spoke, we listened. He was an independent reporter, to our knowledge, he had to be satisfied with the investigation and truth of what he was reporting, to our knowledge, and we took what he said very seriously.



Our wether: Walter The Newswether; or, if belled, Walter the Newsbellwether.


There we are. The bellwether is tinkling somewhere comforting.


III. Alas - Betrayed These Days By False Bellwethers.



Oh, my - we have privatization, and special and individual business interests controlling the reporting of our news, and our old trusty bellnewswether has become a slantwether.



News conglomerates bought and paid for. See the tilting of the news to persuade us of what the herder wants us to believe for its own profit or other control.



Seldom is heard these days the actual direct statements of a candidate as to positions; instead, the bellnewswether (newsbellwether?) airs himself or herself airing some distortion of what the candidate may or may not have said. Is that true?



IV. So What's a Sheep To Do?



How to know when we are listening to



  • a true newswether, with no agenda, providing complete, accurate information; or


  • a newsbellwether, with a clear agenda to persuade us of something, and the conditioning to be sure we go where we are told; or the most extreme,


  • the slantwether who will persuade us of anything that makes the slantwether wealthier.

Example: Is Fox News a newswether place, or newsbellwether place or a slantnewswether or slantnewsbellwether.



How to know? We look for the herder, identify the herder, and go from there. Also, see who runs the herder. Coming to mind here is President Cheney insisting that Fox news be set on the hotel TV each place he goes. See ://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0322061cheney1.html.

Is the Vice President the herder checking on the bellwethers at Fox? Or is it Mr. Rove, still? Say it isn't so.



Research it: What is the similarity between White House Talking Points with the Talking Points laid out at Fox by the foxwethers there. So far they look very close - search the idea - we found several, such as ://mediamatters.org/items/200506240003.



Our conclusion:



Fox News is a newsbellwether and slantwether place. Their focus on persuasion gives them away. All we like sheep.... Get a Handel on it - See (hear) ://www.ez-tracks.com/mySpace-code-795.html



IV. Can, and do, the sheep ever not follow the bellwether.



How can we develop an internal alarm so we back off if the newsbellwether is leading us astray, providing only what the owner of the station wants. Do we follow right off the edge because we are not thinking for ourselves? What to watch for:



A. Less "news," skewed news when we compare it to the internet sources (if you have computer access and literacy), news replaced by puppies and crosswords suddenly half a page big, weather also taking up half a page.



All fun and no news?



For our Hartford Courant, since the Tribune was bought by Zell, we get increasing amounts of non-news products like maps and entertainment bits, to 50%. Ads are going up to 50%, if I read our daily's announcement properly. What, some 15% of the total column availability going to news? See ://www.courant.com/news/opinion/letters/hc-digedlets0608.art5jun08,0,4249775.story.



The Tribune owns the Courant, so this is not a local decision. Yet, becoming a news-challenged "news" paper is still a self-inflicted disorder much like shooting self in foot. And it is a way of avoiding responsibility. See ://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/shoot_yourself_in_the_foot.



3. We smell a rat. Cut out News in the months before the election??



The timing of this news deprivation is suspect. It smacks of special interests. Whose interests are served by reducing news to about 15% of the total columns in a "news" paper? And in an election year? Only those who don't want us thinking for ourselves; want to keep info out.



Ask Sherlock



The media Bellwethers, the belled rams or non-rams, have turned on us, leading us off the cliffs with their panel and round-table repetitive dinging.



Even putting opinion into the news account itself as though point of view were factual. And this is the news that we used to trust, at ;east some of the talking heads. FN 2 for how to spot them.



Have we polluted ourselves with incestuous media relationships. Like the Cheney-Cheney connections, producing what they did. See ://blog.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/2008/06/dick_cheneys_incest_joke_irks.html.



Hartford Courant there at the bottom, considering the Public Interest of News Readers



V. Upshot: Go to the Internet for News, especially using Foreign News; or buy a foreign paper.



We, the Sheeple, have to find another Bellwether Source. Time to go abroad.



Some time ago we found the Financial Times to be a good source for US news. And world news. See Hello, Fodder, News Contest Nominations.



Many of us can't afford actually to go abroad any more, see Europe Road Ways. But we recall how useful it was once to hear international views about us, directly, by being over there on occasion. Now we go on the internet.



But this is no wide-scale solution. Many people are not on the internet. Computers cost. How to get households wired if they don't have food or healthcare or jobs?



Perhaps that is that part of the purpose of media news deprivation - just keep people entertained by the TV's they do have. If they can't get comprehensive and neutral American news on TV or radio, they don't get news. But is it where the government and the FCC and media ownership is sending us. FN 3 on what we find in foreign news.



Fire! Fire! Election on Fire! But no news in the newspapers....



Foreign policy? What foreign policy? No reference in our daily.

...................................................................................

FN 1 Wether is an ancient term. The term originated before the 12th Century. See http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wether; even the 9th Century, see http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/wether. See ://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellwether. The term is also used for stocks - which trades statistically signal what is to follow, perhaps.



FN 2 Spot them these ways:



a. those who rush about inflaming without providing full information;



b. those who tuck in fabricated connections to serve a pre-agenda conclusion, and



c. the rest of the skip-to-my lou's, like big house dobbies, churning up, resentful and undercutting.Other paper tentacle owners - Rupert Murdoch - we hardly know ye. What do you own, what do you push, does that make you a pusher, or is that free speech. See news fact ratings, Joy of Equivocating, Fact Content News Ratings.



Will someone please pick up the ball and fight that reduction of news in news papers, in favor of ads and entertainment.



FN 3 Foreign news about us:



You will, emphasis on the will, find matters not reported here, alarms and concerns too often suppressed here, and given in an objective way because the sources are not owned by the people who are pushing opinions.



The range of new news - from the immediately critical information about policy, to the soaps of an inheritance - Budweiser and Cindy. Find the "purity" standard, the Reinheitsgebot, applied to beer in Europe and not here. US Budweiser drinkers have a right to know that what they order as Budweiser in Europe is better (purer, the real thing) than what they get as trademarked "Budweiser" here -



Find other perspectives on our news - see
Joy of Equivocating, Beer "Reinheitsgebot" purity standard, issue among others in US-Czech Beer trademark disputes.











Wednesday, June 4, 2008

Citizens: Participate. Defend. Now Abide Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt, and the Greatest of These is Fear.

 Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt
Gene Amdahl



A photo with no other context. How does your imagination fill in the blanks.



Kudowa Zdroj, PL. Are you scared yet? *



You should be. Research is showing that once a person draws a conclusion, particularly with an emotional pull, that conclusion is etched in the brain. It continues to affect the thought process even if the person articulates his or her disregard of the idea, intellectually. The emotional drag drags on. Emoticon dominance.



So: how is your brain doing on politics? See ://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/11/opinion/11freedman.html. Read and find how they can measure your amygdala's response to anxiety produced by a negative view of something. Your amygdala is in your brain. It is unruly.



1. Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. FUD. The old Evil Threesome, in use now for years in marketing and politics, now works in demonstrable ways.



How, then, to promote people's independent thought, if their brains have been highjacked in advance, and even without their knowledge, so that they react to fear, not to considering solutions. It takes balance. See also ://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2006/09/18/brain/.



Watch for its tracks. Look for partial facts, denigration, fright scenes, bald conclusions, pictures out of context, and carefully winnowed facts, before all the facts are equally out there. See emoticon dominance as an informal theory at Joy of Equivocating, How Legend Supersedes Facts, Emoticon Dominance. FUD! Incoming! And the level head of Ron Paul, yes, Ron Paul, saw it, warned, and was disregarded. You have heard the others who said no. Now see Ron Paul and give him credit also, at ://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2002/cr090402.htm



1.1 FUD used to propagandize.

  • Conjured gainst immigrants without documentation, for example.


  • Or California and its seeing gays as people.

  • Or a simple fist-bump (this an update 6/10/08),http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1812102,00.html; or http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=7679

  • the race card and gender card, recently combined in the nomination race


An overlay of FUD is like fast-food chicken. Just inject FUD, like a fake flavor enhancer, into whatever the other side says, or represents in terms of position, and watch people's taste buds jump to swallow it.



2. Why does it work so well?



2.1. It moves. Goes right to the heart, bypassing the brain.



2.2 It spreads under the radar. FUD can be spread by body language, the sneer, the scoff, the scold. It attacks through the tone of a candidate's voice in conveying that voters had better be wary, as well as the actual words.



2.3 It is the first recourse for those whose merits cannot carry their positions. Finding FUD in the message means that the position of the person on the merits is weak, very weak. Macchiavelli, see ://www.philosophypages.com/hy/3v.htm, would be proud.



2.4 It hitchhikes on our need to "flock" in order to be "safe." See Joy of Equivocating, Flocking: Boids of a Feather. There is danger in thinking on your own. Better trust somebody else.



3. How to defend.



3.1 Name the issue
. FUD. The name is not new, or cutesy added.



History - Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt was first coined in a corporate setting. Credit former IBM employee Gene Amdahl with the acronym. See Bogomilia, Site for the Unsung: Gene Amdahl. He came up with a product after leaving IBM. IBM, instead of touting its superiority, threw the FUD at Amdahl, the inventor, and prevailed. See ://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt.



3.2 Then toggle into alarm mode when it surfaces. FUD may or may not be justified as a response to a situation. The point is: get the facts, then decide.



3.3 Envision yourself actually confronted with someone lobbing FUD.



Over here is Elmer Fudd aiming the blunderbuss. "I'll get that pethky wabbit!" He mutters.



Out pops the head of Bugs Bunny. Bugs sees, slightly leans to one side to get out of the way, and says, "Ennnh, What's Up Doc?"



Took sensible action, not scared, keeps on at the carrot. See LooneyTunes at ://looneytunes.warnerbros.com/stars_of_the_show/elmer_fudd/elmer_story.html.



Now, maybe sometime old Elmer will come with a real plan that justifies Bugs being in fear, uncertainty and doubt. Our Bugs, however, being wise and having perspective, always stays alert so he will get the facts and tell the difference.IBM was a worthy opponent and won the round against Amdahl, but we all learned from it - or should have. Salute, Gene



Moral: We are the current Pethky Wabbits, strong forces of special interests are taking aim and spewing FUD to keep us from thinking, so stay on toes. FN 1. If we do swallow FUD as a substitute for merit or analysis, our independent thought is GONZO.



Tha-tha-that's all, folks!



Next: Should the FDA ban all use of FUD as a political carcinogen?

.........................................................



FN 1 Examples. Find FUD at 3AM with the phone call, with George and Louise at coffee, talking healthcare; with photos of people looking different, Lou Dobbs using "statistics" to prove that hate crimes are not up as to immigrants despite unleashed media hate talk: where the stats are from an anti-immigrant group to begin with, and undocumented people can't report crime against them because they might be deported. FUD. Whatever pushes FUD gets the idea internalized.



FUD set a sales precedent, for ideologies and products. Propaganda is more effective than truth, unless people are alerted to the techniques. How does your news media fare on "news" ratings? See ours at PoseJuxta, Platform: News Fact Ratings Disclosures.



......................

* FUD. Nothing to be afraid of here, once you know. This is a window at Kudowa Zdroj is in Poland, near the border of the Czech Republic. It is not frightening at all, but its photo here could be made to be so, depending on what is said or omitted, or where it is applied. This is a Chapel built in 1776, and was the population's reasoned, respectful response to the thousands of deaths resulting from the Thirty Years' War (Catholic vs. Protestant Reformers) and plague. See ://www.britannica.com/eb/topic-1208125/Kudowa-Zdroj; the town is also a spa area. See ://www.pl-info.net/poland/health-spas/kudowa-zdroj.html . At the Chapel, see neat stacks of bones, like with like, disinterred when more room was needed in the graveyard. See whole skeletons, below the floorboards as you pass, and see how skulls of differing racial groups look - Tatar, for example. And how injuries impact bone. These ossuaries are an uncommon sight. Look for octagonal or other multi-sided smaller buildings within the grounds of a church, the "close" walls.