Necessary Illusions: Thought Control in Democratic Societies

If you've long perceived that the news programs that glow from the corporately empowered tabernacles from the mouths of the disembodied (E-band) spirits that you invite into your living rooms are exceptionally contrived and manipulative in their very selective content, their interviews biased to promote the perception that all is well (at least for the E-band executive conducting the interview and his or her wealthy subject), and their aggressive efforts to assert that America isn't a concept that, in terms of its original intent of individual democracy and enforceable legal rights, died at roughly the same time that railroads arose, produced massive wealth for very few, and managed to get the Supreme Court of the day to declare them to have all the legal rights of individuals, then you might want to read this book and gain some insight into how corporate power is manifested in the news media. This may sound like a dark perspective, but you may rest assured that the author of this book, consistent with his own propaganda model of the mass media, and those who are given access to it, is too often strangely chipper in his perspectives on the topic, so fear not.

Noam Chomsky is an important linguistic theorists and social writer. In this book Chomsky looks at how elites maintain political power through propaganda that distorts and confuses major issues. The first 130 or so pages are originally based on a series of lectures given on the Canadian Broadcasting System, so the style is engaging and easy to follow. He follows this up with 220 or so pages of appendices that address criticisms of his original talks. This detracts a little for the books overall coherence.

Brilliant and insightful. I am a conservative rightwing voter but Professor Chomsky insight into power and the control of and by the media is truly frightening. Don't believe what you are told by the media. Do be fooled by the propaganda machine. Everyone should read his books regardless of your political or religious views. Yes, I am still a conservative rightwing voter but much better informed and aware.

Unlike the unfortunate trend I see on the left to review and condemn books by the likes of Coulter etc with out reading them, I will begin by stating that I could not read this whole book. Bad facts,outright lies (someone please send him to southeast Asia to speak with some lucky peasants who survived what he denies) are great examples of why I had to put this down so often. Chomsky has for some years now preached to those who do not know any history (unless spoon fed by the left) and do not have the skills to research information to find the truth nearest the center. I like (liked?) Chomsky as a voice of dissent on some important issues but he joins the ranks of holocaust deniers with his comments on Pol-Pot. This book is long winded and rambling at times, I understand how pseudo-intellectuals love this kind of dissertation but it only obscures the truth on important matters adding confusion to complex topics.This book and from my tastes of his more current works seem to suffer more and more from this. His titles imply easy truths but you will find them hard or impossible to find amidst bad facts and long winded unfocused paragraphs. All this and I still consider Chomsky important and correct on some very critical points, he just ruins them by not staying in touch with reality or failing to see basic truths. I see a fantastic phenomenon on the horizon, As Chomsky ages he will become senile,half his followers will be awe struck at the depth and original logic of his newfound reasoning while the other half tear at each other in a crazed attempt to find relevance(and explain it to the rest of us) in each new tome that comes out of his deteriorating mind.

It is a great piece, part of a large bodyof work by professor Chomsky that getsto some of the most important points.

perfect

Of all the articles and books of Chomsky that I have read, Necessary Illusions: Thought Control in Democratic Societies is without doubt the most exhaustively researched (and footnoted), the most logically structured, and the most convincing. Chomsky reminds us that the majority of the populace rely on the various media institutions for their information about political affairs; both domestic and foreign. One can only hold an opinion on a topic if one knows about the topic. So take, for example, the popular myth of the 'persistent Soviet vetoe' at the UN during the cold war. Why do people believe the USSR was constantly vetoeing any and every Security Council Resolution? Simple! When they did, it generated front page condemnation. When the US or the UK exercised their right of veteo: silence. As Chomsky notes, during the years of 1970 and 1989 the former Soviet Union veteod 8 resolutions. The US veteod some 56. This is what Chomsky refers to as Thought Control. Unless the public examine the factual record of the UN themselves, they will never come by this information, (at least not in the mainstream press). So although Chomsky's title may appear somewhat paradoxical, or oxymoronic, a moments reflection on such facts shows it to be, in fact, extremenly pragmatic and truthful. The question is, have you the honesty and sheer guts to question yourself and challenge the information which has contributed to your beliefs? The crux of Chomsky's argument is that propaganda is to a democracy what violence is to a dictatorship. Chomsky points out that, in fact, propaganda is, contrary to popular postulations, more important and vital to a democratic society because people still have some rights. That is, since people can talk, the powers that be must ensure that only the correct words come out of the peoples' mouths. In a dictatorship it does not really matter too much what people think; for whatever they may think, they have to do what they are told, by pain of death. In countries such as the US (and the UK) other, more subtle, methods are required. People often critisise Chomsky for the sources of his information (the copious footnotes). No such critique can be levelled at this work. Chomsky's sources are declassified internal planning documents, naval proceedings documents, and the very institutions he examines, New York Times, Washington Post etc. If there was one Chomsky book I would suggest you to read, this would be it.

Good read

Relevant

I found some answers!

realistic

A must read for those WHO want to understand the world.