96. I saw that the Socialist-Marxist organisations mastered and applied this instrument with astounding skill. And I soon realised that the correct use of propaganda is a true art which has remained practically unknown to the bourgeois parties.
Times have changed. Now, all political parties use propaganda in a most ingenious and subtle manner. Moreover, all big online companies do use it with superb finesse. It has come to such a level that if one has the money to pull things off, anything can be fed to the people and they made to believe it.
Just a negative discussion about Facebook will bring in millions of people-interest in it. So, it is only intelligent to ponder on who actually sponsors such negative discussions.
As to propaganda, and indoctrination, people in India believe that English rule was terrible. They massacred people. They looted the nation. The divided a seven thousand year old nation and ruled the place. Each one of these terrible accusation about a most benign rule has been purposefully indoctrinated into the minds of the people.
Look at this conversation that I had in our pristine-ENGLISH Community Whatsapp Group:
QUOTE: But, what about Jalianwalabagh, Malabar riot, death punishments and many other rude actions of British? END OF QUOTE
When I gave a adequate explanation to these queries, see the reply that I received:
QUOTE: thank you for these valuable historical inputs. Most of these information are new to me. I think I never studied the communal clash happened just after independence that caused 10 lakh (I million) death from school text books. END OF QUOTE.
Communist parties were once the masters of the art of political propaganda. However, as of now, every political party with adequate financial resources has acquired mastery in this. Yet, very soft means are used to outmanoeuvre competitors.
97. peoples without honour have sooner or later lost their freedom and independence
I need to pull the above quote away from Adolf Hitler’s context. It is about the word ‘honour’. In feudal languages, the concept of ‘honour’ is kept only for the higher classes. That means, on a relative scale the lower positioned individual has less ‘honour’. This usage of the word ‘honour’ has no connection with the English meaning of honour and honourable.
The antique English meaning of this word is connected to supreme personal qualities of honesty, incorruptibleness, commitment, non-treacherous, dependable, not a turncoat etc. However, as Adolf Hitler uses it, and in the way it is used in the feudal languages of India, it is word connected to social superiority.
The corollary of this meaning is that in feudal language social systems, a great section of the population do not have freedom and independence.
98. Any man who wants to be a cowardly slave can have no honour or honour itself would soon fall into general contempt
Again this should be connected to a feudal language social system. For instance, in most of the government offices of India, the common people of the lower financial classes are addressed as a mere dirt, in the pejorative part of the language codes. However none of them react against this. For, in the government schools, the teachers use the same words and worse, and thus they are trained to be cowardly slaves.
10 to 15 fifteen years of mental slavery in an education system that doesn’t teach anything worthwhile. Most of the teachers do not know much to teach. They themselves would require a huge amount of training in an informal ambience to make them fit to do even a minor bit of teaching.
99. Humanitarianism and aesthetics would vanish even from a world inhabited by man if this world were to lose the races that have created and upheld these concepts
There is a great deal to be mentioned about these words of Adolf Hitler. Even though one might be able to find quite a lot of high aspirations in the various literatures of the ancient world, the concept of humane attitudes are not there much in Asian nations. This might be true about Africa and many Continental European nations. As to the indigenous cultures of South America also, there are quite candid evidences of extreme violence in their social history.
However, when one looks at England, there is a very pleasant level of soft-nature in its history. It is true that many academic experts would find it too terrible a claim to accept. For, did they not burn the witches?, did they not hang the pickpockets?, did they not take part in slave trade? etc. would go the questionings. The fact is that many more terrible things happen in other nations, and no one cares to keep a record of them. Why? Because they are everyday events.
In England, these were exceptions to the ordinary. So, they were kept as records. In the Indian peninsula, there was literally no record keeping. In fact, in modern times, not many students would know about the horrors of Sati, the burning up of women at the pyre of their dead husbands. How many people in current-day India know about the scourge of northern parts of the subcontinent, known as the Thuggees?
Yet, I have seen many great academic geniuses declaiming about the Rotten Boroughs mentioned in Pickwick Papers written by Charles Dickens. They mention it to say that India is merely passing through the same stage that had been in England many years ago. Yet, it goes without saying that in England it was a delightful exception, while in India, it is not a notice worthy exception. No one is really bothered in noticing what an everyday event is. In fact, the possibility is not of India changing into England, but of England changing into India!
It seems quite funny that England never had slaves. In English, it is quite difficult to maintain a slave. The slave will immediately improve to his masters’ mental and social standards. In the Indian peninsula, there is no need for statutory slaves. The language will hold the lower classes down in a mood of quite extinguished self-esteem.
Adolf Hitler’s claim that Germany is the cradle of civilisation and humanitarian concept can be hollow. Germany at best was a newly formed nation. He himself displays a huge content of contempt for the Germans. From a most candid conceptualising, in the case of some of the Continental European nations, their glory is just reflected glory, due to their proximity to England. And also due to the fact that the English are white skin.
In fact, I have seen many people in India, who do not know to differentiate between the words ‘White’ and ‘English’. Instead of saying that ‘We were ruled by the English’, the more easier way of saying is found to be the erroneous words: ‘We were ruled by white-men!’
However, this is not a modern Indian issue. During the colonial days, even the Germans used to move around the interiors of Africa carrying a Union Jack with them. To befool the local populations that they are indeed Englishmen, even though they behaved much crudely.
Beyond that there is this tragic story from the history of the British West African Squadron. When the British sailor on their patrol to catch the slavers and to save the blacks approached a boat full of black natives, who thought that they were the White slave traders from Continental Europe and jumped out of the boat, with disastrous results.
100. where the destiny and existence of a people are at stake, all obligations toward beauty ceases
No comments. Could be true.
101. The receptivity of the great masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous
It is quite funny. When I was spending my life among the government officials of India in my childhood days, the most regular input was that: the members of the public (the common Indians) are donkeys. This is an intimately mentioned talk among the official class of India. Even now!
As to the attribute of oblivion, well, the public as such has only the limited memory what comes in the daily newspaper or in the new visual media.
102. By contrast, the war propaganda of the English and Americans was psychologically sound. By representing the Germans to their own people as barbarians and Huns, they prepared the individual soldier for the terrors of war, and thus helped to preserve him from disappointments.
At the moment, the English nations are just the opposite. I understand that in England, Gandhi is a great personage, when actually he was nothing of that sort. In fact, the current-day native-English youngsters are being deluded into a location from where their own antiquity is being visualised as dirty, and that of other hideous nationalities understood as sweet ones. It is an emerging tragedy in all English nations. That of the national education being taken hostage by rank outsiders.