Politics can be a stressful topic all over the world for a variety of reasons. The most obvious is whether the people elected will actually fulfill their promises and show that they are being honest and trustworthy. Unfortunately, it is more likely than ever that they will deceive the people instead. Artifice can be essential in political theater as well as consumer culture so I agree with Chris Hedges’ statement. A myriad of people have used it to gain fame, money, or power, and eventually abuse it. This can lead to disastrous situations because they might not be qualified for the job. They just need to capture the audience’s attention and woo them into believing their facade. The audience looks for that story in political leaders, waiting for the promises of a better future in their country. To begin with, artifice can work so easily as long as the people can be manipulated. If they’re told what they want to hear, the population eventually fights for that person with all of their being. No one’s ever absolutely sure whether the politician’s words are truthful or not, but they take the chance anyway. At the beginning of Hedges’ excerpt, he explains that political leaders are some of the countless individuals who use …show more content…
It’ no surprise to anyone when they create a story for their docile supporters to follow them. As Hedges had explained, “Those who have not mastered the art of entertainment… are ignored. They become ‘unreal’.” Political leaders need the story, the concern and sympathy towards the citizens of the country so that they will listen and support them. Without it, they’re overlooked and only seen as boring politicians. These political leaders know that without artifice, they’re doomed. There will be no chance of them making it anywhere. It’s quite ironic that those who use artifice are believed in while those who don’t are left in the
The art of artifice compels the idea of false intimacy between a leader and his or her people. This essential skill acts like a play to distract its audience from the reality behind government authority. All a country wants is a leader that can talk the talk and walk the walk, even if they are faking it. In Empire of Illusion by Chris Hedges, the author exemplifies the importance of artifice in political theater and consumer culture since “Those who are best at deception succeed.” Artifice masks the true intentions of political leaders, whether it’s Napoleon’s domination over Europe, Hitler’s rise to power, or Donald Trump’s proposal against illegal immigration.
What makes artifice such an essential skill? In the excerpt from Empire of Illusion by Chris Hedges, it is argued that “the most essential skill… is artifice.” Artifice, the act of deceiving people, can be very useful when you want more power or popularity in the world. Many widely known people use artifice to stay rich, popular, and in power. However, artifice isn’t so essential that everybody needs to be a faker in order to succeed.
Buying media slots for candidates, which used to be a small business just over half a century ago, has grown so that these companies manage “more than $170 billion of their clients’ campaign funds” (Turow 230). This fact about the growth of such an industry should at a minimum raise an eyebrow, as it characterizes the shift and importance this data analysis has become. It also serves as an important point because it fuels the common fear of corruption in politics, as this data essentially offers a window to the responses and how people think to what politicians say. This could lead to the next phase of the “polished politician” where candidates will say statements that statistically receive favorable responses from the population. This strong pathos is a central pillar of the argument Turow is trying to make, effectively playing the emotion of pity from the hypothetical family situation, and building it into a fear of the system and establishment. Such emotions are strong motivators, and this combination encourages the reader to take action, or at the very least inform someone they know about such issues they weren’t even aware were
Hardball: How Politics is Played Told by One Who Knows the Game by Christopher Matthews compares politics to a game played by individuals seeking to gain and maintain power. Matthews defines hardball as “clean, aggressive Machiavellian politics. It is the discipline of gaining and holding power, useful to any profession or undertaking, but practiced more openly and unashamedly in the world of public affairs,” (13). Matthews offers maxims to explain tactics and truths that better a person’s position in the game of politics. These maxims include “It’s Better to Receive than Give”, “Keep Your Enemies in Front of You”, and “Hang a Lantern on Your Problem”. These three maxims have proven successful in bringing success to those who utilized the tactic.
Aristotle, a Greek philosopher, who initially came up with the three different sections of rhetorical appeals and the act of persuasion. The three appeals include ethos, logos and pathos, all three different means of persuasion. Michael Moore’s, Capitalism: A Love Story will be used and examples will be taken from throughout the movie to analyze his rhetorical techniques when reaching out to the audience. Examples from “The Qualities of the Prince” by Niccoló Machiavelli will also be analyzed for the three appeals. Moore’s movie relates exactly to the rhetorical appeals because he is persuading the readers to realize all the corrupt and unjust happenings that are going on all around us without even knowing it. He is trying to explain to the readers that it is going on everywhere and steps to educate their selves to gain awareness in the corruption of America. His video shows many examples of the “behind the scenes” into the political world and cites all the events back to how and why it is ruining our country and what we can do to prevent and/or help the cause. Machiavelli’s piece also was a form of persuasion and rhetoric’s, using all three appeals as well. “The Qualities of the Prince” is a piece by Machiavelli in which he is trying to explain how a prince should act and what traits they should possess to be a successful leader. Machiavelli is using the rhetoric appeals and explaining his experiences through which he has learned what it takes to be a great prince.
As easy as actors put on clothes and become a different person to film a movie, successful politicians appear much more heartfelt and honest as they are in real life. This is backed by the idea posed by Chris Hedges that “political leaders…..no longer need to be competent, sincere, or honest. They need only to appear to have these qualities.” If a politician were able to appear honest and heartfelt in a campaign event, they would much more likely to appeal to the audience and be able to win their trust and vote in some cases and succeed in winning an election to the benefit of the politician and not the audience. . Similar, posed propaganda and social medias of today are often used to exploit the audience and give them poorly supported feelings of support and trust for these political leaders.
Another controlling method that is diffused through television, radio and written publications; is any reported information about world politics and news. Powerful political groups narrow people’s views of what is going on around them by tainting and twisting information to their own device. They decide what to say and when to say it, revealing as much or little information as desired, in ‘befitting’ instances; thus enabling them to hide information they consider deleterious to themselves, from the public. It also permits them to depict opponents in overly negative terms.
Only a person who thinks that man is evil would think of such ways to run a government in the way that Machiavelli thought a government should be operated. Machiavelli felt that “crafty and deceitful princes have historically defeated the faithful princes”(Prince). What happened to the idea of a caring leader, one who could be trusted to make decisions that the majority of the people agreed with? I do not agree with Machiavelli that a leader should be deceitful in order to for his country to succeed or grow. I think that what a leader is depends on what type of man you are good or evil.
... point, ambitious politicians begin to brainwash their constituents until they [the officials] get what they want and the people no longer trust the politicians and become apathetic toward the entire system.
Engelstad, Audun. "Watching Politics: The Representation of Politics in Primetime Television Drama." NORDICOM Review 29.2 (2008): 309-324. Communication & Mass Media Complete. Web. 16 Mar. 2014.
Louw, P. E. (2010). Spin Doctoring: The Art of Public Relations. The media and political process (2ed., p. 81). London: SAGE.
“Ignorance is strength” is true considering the fact that the party is outnumbered by the rest of the population, especially the proles. The proles have the least amount of knowledge as to what is actually going on in their world, which is why the Party easily gets away with all of their manipulative tactics. Since the proles are disregarded from society, but more notably, are unbothered by the Party, they have no desire to rebel against the strict hierarchical structure imposed by Big Brother. The Party makes their own reality by holding the power to alter the past in whatever way they please and the people do not have the mindset to object. “But by far the more important reason for the readjustment of the past is the need to safeguard the infallibility of the Party." This explains why manipulation is crucial for the Party to stay in absolute power. They want the masses to believe what they are told in spite of what they might think otherwise. Doublethink is the most effective way the party manipulates their people to avoid free thinking. Doublehink is a practice that keeps individuals free of their own thoughts. This is how the Party gets away with all the lying they do in the Ministry of Truth. Through the propagandas and the Ministry of Truth, the Party also define what is true and what is false. O’Brien once said to Winston, “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present
...phere as the “sphere of private people who join together to form a ‘public’” and through the celebrification of politicians, the public sphere has been widened. We live in a world where anyone in the news, a politician, a footballer, a reality TV star, is a celebrity. Although we do not need to know the behind-the-scenes of each of their lives, it is of interest to the public and stories that are interesting to the public, sell the most newspapers. But because people buy newspapers because of celebrity gossip etc, the public sphere widens as a result. This stark fact was candidly recognised by Rupert Murdoch and as the head of News International, he described his company as being “in the entertainment business” (Shawcross, 1992: 261) and for this reason, the celeberification of politicians will neither cease, nor damage democratical debate within the public sphere.
Political efficacy refers to the degree in which an individual believes he or she has an ability to influence the government (Chan 2014). The decision to engage with politics is usually a result of one’s attitudes towards participation, in the sense that there cannot be a political action without some prior thought about a political issue. One of the common attitudes related to political participation is political efficacy (Caprara et al., 2009). Political efficacy is individual's faith and trust in government and their belief that they can understand and influence political affairs. it is commonly measured by surveys and is used as an indicator for the broader health of civil society. When an individual has low efficacy, he does not have faith in his
In the US, mass media plays a significant role in politics. One of the key roles mass media plays in politics includes the airing of the platforms of various politicians. The media influences the view of people on politics and politicians. As the opinion of individuals is affected, the results of the votes are consequently changed (Holden, 2016).