ისტორიის გაყალბება როგორც პროპაგანდის ინსტრუმენტი
Loading...
Date
2024-02-14
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
ივანე ჯავახიშვილის სახელობის თბილისის სახელმწიფო უნივერსიტეტის გამომცემლობა
Abstract
The report discusses the tools of propaganda, among which the falsification
of history is one of the most effective and relevant topics of all
times. Although modern Georgian history textbooks do not contain
examples of falsification of history, especially radical or extremist assessments,
still, to achieve a specific propaganda goal, textbook authors sometimes
manage to reveal their subjective attitude to political events.
They achieve this when, depending on their political orientation, they cover
an event acceptable to them, or ignore it. They also do not dare to
adequately cover sensitive issues. They often turn a blind eye to them or
only cover them one-sidedly and repeat the existing stereotypes.
Based on the study of the general theoretical framework of propaganda
tools, the report highlights the tools of propaganda that are used
in history teaching. The mentioned framework is suitable for all historical periods, and evaluations of a specific event or person and is mainly based
on the falsification of history.
Each direction of propaganda: political, economic, social, cultural,
and ideological has its methods, including different types of visual material.
No less important is the written material, its content, and the formulation
of questions and tasks in textbooks. Sometimes every word - assessment,
key question, and other questions can be asked in such a way
as to serve the purpose of propaganda.
The report is based on the classification of propaganda methods developed
by Alfred and Elizabeth Lee (“The Fine Art of Propaganda” 1939).
Out of the seven methods of propaganda studied by the authors, the
paper focuses on those methods that are used both in world history and
in the history of Georgia.
Among them, perhaps the most popular method is name-calling propaganda,
which means giving a person or idea a bad label (usually undeservedly)
by using an easy-to-remember pejorative name. This method
occurs when the author wants to dismiss and condemn a person or idea
without examining what the label means. For example, during the Cold
War in the Soviet Union the West in general, and primarily the United
States and its allies were called imperialists; also, terrorists, extremists,
Nazis, slaves, etc. For example, the terrorist has a negative connotation.
It is used by both the West and the Russian government when describing
any individual or group they oppose. Conversely, when the government
wants to praise or support a group, it uses titles such as freedom fighters
or rebels.
Therefore, the authors of history textbooks should refrain from such
labels and be as neutral as possible. It will not be difficult to find them in
Georgian history textbooks (they may even escape experts if they are not
aware of propaganda methods well or do not want to see them). Only by
teaching a critical and objective attitude (thinking) to the information
that students receive and to the motives of their distributors, it is possible
to recognize false information and, accordingly, propaganda. It is
also desirable to compile a list of labels that historians use for propaganda
in the past or today.
The paper also discusses such a tool of propaganda used in history,
especially in political campaigns, as glittering generalities. A good
example of this method is the slogans of American presidents’ election campaigns and their programs. For example, Biden’s - Build Back Better;
Trump’s - Make America Great Again/MAGA; Obama’s - Change We Can
Believe In; his own Yes We Can; Hillary Clinton's - Forward Together, etc.
Studying history provides a good opportunity to analyze them and draw
conclusions.
If historians use the name-calling propaganda when they want to
make a good idea look bad, they need glittering generalities to make a
bad idea look good. Any good, positive word has a distinct meaning for
different people. For example, we perceive the word democracy according
to our own experience and knowledge, and we believe that others
understand it as we do. But the words “the US wants to spread democracy
in the world” do not have a positive meaning for Afghans and North
Koreans.
The name-calling method encourages us to reject ideas and people
or evidence, while glittering generalities expect us to like ideas and people
without evidence. The propagandists want us to ignore the details.
They hope that these good words will cause a positive emotion.
Based on the study of specific examples, the report emphasizes the
diversity of propaganda tools and the need to use modern methods of
history teaching to identify them, such as the development of critical and
analytical thinking, and multi-perspectivity, which also provides the opportunity
to identify false history.
Description
Keywords
Citation
თბილისის უნივერსიტეტის დაარსებისადმი მიძღვნილი სამეცნიერო კონფერენცია. თსუ 106, თეზისები, 2024, გვ.: 64-69 / Scientific conference dedicated to the foundation of Tbilisi University. TSU 106, Abstracts, 2024, pp.: 64-69