Support Our Troops, Sheeple

Cognitive Dissonance and Propaganda

Noam Chomsky is a badass. By which, I mean that he is not afraid to be vocally critical of bullsh#%, and- unlike so many people- he backs his points up with reasons, really good reasons.

One of my favorite criticisms by Chomsky is about the slogan "Support Our Troops":

 [...] the point of public relations slogans like "Support Our Troops" is that they don't mean anything [...] that's the whole point of good propaganda. You want to create a slogan that nobody is going to be against and I suppose everybody will be for, because nobody knows what it means, because it doesn't mean anything. But its crucial value is that it diverts your attention from a question that does mean something, do you support our policy? And that's the one you're not allowed to talk about.

Chomsky argues, very pointedly, that the slogan has become a thought-terminating cliche: one utters it as a panacea solution and it ends discussion. A thought-terminating cliche quells cognitive dissonance by cutting across a complex argument with a dead-end piece of drivel, often culled from a nugget of folk wisdom.

The point of Chomsky's argument is that these slogans are bandied about by politicians, picked up by news pundits, and generally used to avoid having a reasonable discussion in which one's personal opinions may be challenged.

I used to be a non-conformist, before it was mainstream.

As much as I am a fan of existential angst, when someone drops an "it is what it is" on me, I have trouble continuing the conversation. What is even more annoying, in my opinion, is the use of "sheeple" (sheep-people, implying that sheeple just follow the shepherd of mass consciousness, media control and Big Brother).

What is so annoying about this phrase is that I do truly believe in questioning the "norms." I like to question the status quo and I wonder why people are always so quick to utter a phrase to the effect of "that's not how we used to do" or "back in the good old days." "They don't build these like they used to," is a particularly amusing statement, to which I often think: "what with asbestos and lead paint?"

Dismissing an opposing opinion as belonging to a "sheeple" (sheerson?) is just as thought terminating as a parent justifying their reasoning with "because I said so."

A rant that I recently read using this term:

I disliked hipsters before it was cool. Wait, does that makes me a hipster?

Actually, it has become such a common and popular statement that you could say that its use is in itself a sign of sheeplehood.

Its use shows a narcissistic arrogance, which implies that the person uttering it is the only one to understand an issue, and that anyone who disagrees must be doing so out of mindless indoctrination.

In reality though, such statement proves nothing, kills any serious and nuanced line of conversation, and exposes you as an overbearing douche.

So, next time you want to contribute to a conversation with a piece "folk wisdom," maybe try an original thought instead of something that will have the same effect on a conversation as something dropped from a dog's rear-end.

Or not, whatever. You only live once, ya know.