by Naresh Jotwani

An earlier blog post (here) argued that the ideology of ‘capitalism’ is no more than a cover for insatiable greed. The present post describes the media psy-ops which ‘capitalist rulers’ carry out 24×7 upon the host society. This post is based on the goings-on within ‘the sole superpower’, but clearly similar tactics are also seen elsewhere — because people are people, and societies are societies.

Greedy ‘big money rulers’ operate from behind the curtain, because unsavoury truths must not be allowed to leak out. Therefore the ‘rulers’ hire ‘experts’, ‘specialists’ and ‘talking heads’ to serve as their megaphones, to deliver custom designed, deceptive narratives over media channels.

The narrative bombardment is ceaseless, essentially psy-ops upon the host society. The aim is to overwhelm and misdirect citizens while ‘big money’ operates and exploits unhindered. NYT, WaPo, Fox, WSJ, MSNBC … et cetera … are the prominent ones among hundreds of loudly blaring megaphones.

Outwardly, therefore, the show is run by so-called ‘experts’, ‘technocrats’ and their PR machines. Opportunities for gaming the system are many. Time-tested techniques of cronyism, mutual back-scratching, kickbacks, deception, lies, blackmail, backstabbing … et cetera … are employed brazenly to further individual goals. Anything goes. ‘Big money rulers’ do not object to any of that because (a) ‘the rulers’ are amoral, and (b) such shenanigans make their lackeys and sycophants easier to control and manipulate.

Noble causes proclaimed loudly in public – such as ‘equality’, ‘democracy’ or ‘civilized debate’ – are used only as fig leaves to hide the ugly reality of ‘big money operations’ from public view.

Periodically, as distractions, ‘experts’ and ‘technocrats’ invent yet another ‘societal challenge’. They propose ‘the best available policy option’ to meet the challenge, and make a big PR show of offering their solution to the society. Of course, the real beneficiaries of such campaigns are the ‘big money rulers’. Such periodic distractions keep the people from learning how ‘big money’ scams ordinary people 24×7.

If one ‘bold policy initiative’ does not work out, no problem. There are plenty more in the fertile minds which created that one. Public memory is short. Another ‘bold policy initiative’ appears soon, with yet another slick narrative. The psy-op scam goes on. An excellent example is provided by a scam which was named The Project for the New American Century. Wikipedia has the following introduction:

The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was a neoconservative think tank based in Washington, D.C., that focused on United States foreign policy. It was established as a non-profit educational organization in 1997, and founded by William Kristol and Robert Kagan. PNAC’s stated goal was ‘to promote American global leadership’. The organization stated that ‘American leadership is good both for America and for the world’, and sought to build support for ‘a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity’.

Where is America now, less than three decades into the new century? Where is ‘American leadership’ and ‘moral clarity’? In the current global context, that PNAC declaration invites only ridicule. Its founders, from the so-called ‘neoconservative’ movement, have moved on to other things.

Covid-19, MAGA and AI are other examples of self-serving media hype.

One may compare the above with the tough market test which any consumer product has to face. For example, if a manufacturer claims to have developed a better quality of TV, consumers have a right to test the product, verify the claims and decide whether to spend their hard-earned money on the new TV. Validation by consumers is a crucial and essential step for a product introduced to society.

With new and unproven policy options, ordinary citizens have no right to opine. This is an anomalous and unstable situation. The consequences of unsound policies invariably fall upon unsuspecting ordinary citizens. An invisible ‘caste system’ judges large sections of the population as being incapable of debating ‘policy’, and honest public debate is avoided.

Does a ‘bold policy initiative’ ever get properly evaluated in retrospect, after its obvious failure? Ordinary people do not question ‘experts’ because they have naive faith in these intellectual scammers. That naive faith is exploited ‘to the hilt’ by the greedy capitalists. In effect, the naive faith and simplicity of ordinary people ends up damaging their own lives.

Well-being of fellow citizens is not even a valid issue in current public debate, as each ‘expert’ defends the private interests of his ‘big money’ paymaster. What should be the obvious common issue – the well-being of society – receives hardly even a passing mention. ‘Big money’ and their megaphone operators are not ordinary people. They have no notion of what ordinary lives are, or what their policies do to ordinary lives.

‘Big money’ has control over legislation. Specially crafted laws ensure that their cruel and amoral exploitation tactics are, by the letter of the law, made perfectly legal. A huge army of lawyers is in constant deployment to devise suitable laws and to block off all legal challenges. In the words of our Co-Editor R. Srinivasan, ‘Lawyers are the best collaborators of the rich against ordinary citizens‘.

Within ‘the superpower’, such attitudes result in a very strong centrifugal tendency in public affairs, a tendency which is compounded by every government decision. Every new issue divides the society further. The greedy behave like hyenas, tugging with bloody fangs at the remaining healthy parts of society, until little remains of the healthy parts. The parasite fattens itself at the cost of the host.

Overall well-being of the society requires a broad view and balanced, impartial approach. The priceless core of well-being is abandoned when greedy ‘special interests’ abandon the core and run amuk in every conceivable direction away from it. If the well-being of ordinary people is not on anybody’s agenda, how can it ever be achieved?

---

Suppose one adopts not GDP or wealth but a different criterion for judging the quality of governance.

• How well are competing societal interests being reconciled and resolved?
• How well are core societal values protected?
• To put is in an old-fashioned way: How wise are government policies?

By this criterion, a poorer society of the Global South may well be doing far better than ‘the superpower’. By this criterion, ‘the sole superpower’ itself is a helpless victim of a shocking core policy vacuum — in the midst of countless brilliant policy papers and slick PR campaigns!