The lies of others
Western countries are very capable of recognizing war propaganda—but only when it comes from the “enemy” camp.
Sir Arthur Ponsonby established the guiding principles of war propaganda in 1928, looking back on the catastrophe of World War I. His analysis was self–critical and aimed at British public relations. However, many who consider themselves to be on the side of good today believe that self-criticism is unnecessary. If it is practiced at all, it is done quietly and discreetly in retrospect — when it is actually too late and the dead have long since been laid to rest. When people talk about propaganda today, they always mean the propaganda of the enemy. Sir Arthur’s principles are useful in making us aware of this.
[This article posted on 11/8/2024 is translated from the German on the Internet, https://www.manova.news/artikel/die-lugen-der-anderen.]
“The first casualty of war is truth.” This is a somewhat condensed version of a phrase coined by Sir Arthur Ponsonby, 1st Baron Ponsonby of Shulbrede. He was a member of the House of Commons from 1908 to 1918, during the Great War, which is known as World War I not only in Germany. The original wording in his book Falsehood in War-Time, published in 1928, is: “When war is declared, Truth is the first casualty.” (1) Sir Arthur does not only refer to the enemy – he also briefly lists the lies of the other parties involved, namely Germany, France, the US, and Italy, at the end – he aims above all to expose his own British war propaganda.
The Belgian historian Anne Morelli then extracted the ten guiding principles (principes élémentaires) of war propaganda from Sir Arthur Ponbonby’s work (2):
We do not want war.
The enemy camp is responsible.
The enemy leader is a devil.
We are fighting for a good cause.
The enemy is fighting with illegal weapons.
The enemy commits atrocities intentionally, we only accidentally.
Our losses are low, the enemy’s are enormous.
Artists and intellectuals support our cause.
Our mission is sacred.
Anyone who questions our reporting is a traitor.
Just how helpful these guidelines are in recognizing disinformation propaganda can be seen in the current case of Russia’s “unprovoked, brutal, and illegal war of aggression” against peaceful Ukraine:
- The West did not want war, which is why it armed Ukraine to become the strongest land force in Europe and refused to negotiate with Russia in December 2021 and January 2022.
- Russia’s attack was clearly contrary to international law and, of course, unprovoked; it was definitely not foreseeable that the Russians would consider adherence to their red line a reason for escalation. It is tragic that the West knew this with astonishing accuracy but was simply unable to do anything about it, because
- Vladimir Putin is power-hungry, pursues an imperialist strategy, and is quite comparable to Hitler and Stalin.
- The West, on the other hand, is fighting for the freedom of peoples to join NATO.
- Russia, however, is blowing up its own gas pipelines, trying to blackmail Europe, and, as the world’s largest grain exporter, is responsible for world hunger.
- Bucha is just the tip of the iceberg of atrocities committed by the Russian army, including systematic rape, child abductions, the bombing of maternity clinics, etc., and experts therefore believe that we must not forget “that even if Russians look European, they are not Europeans – in the cultural sense” (3). The rocket attacks on markets in the Donbass region of our Ukrainian allies, on the other hand, are so alien to their AntiFa liberation army that we could only attribute them to the Russians at first, until the whole thing turned out to be a regrettable mistake, probably due to the use of old Soviet-designed weapon systems.
- But no matter how criminally the enemy operates, it will fail, because its losses are high and cannot be compensated for—the Russian army has been running out of ammunition for months and is already resorting to microchips from refrigerators (4). Russia is therefore suffering severely from the sanctions—for example, its economic growth is now only 3 percent, while the US is achieving 2.5 percent and Germany is shrinking back to health at 0 percent. It is bleeding out with heavy losses, so that support among the population, now only two-thirds, is dwindling and collapse is imminent. The high losses on the enemy side only testify to how ruthlessly the enemy is sacrificing its youth to its own interests. The losses on our side – however high they may be – only demonstrate our determination not to bow to barbarism and are testimony to our duty of solidarity for the greater and absolutely good whole.
- We just need to hold out a little longer and continue to ensure our unconditional support.
The good cause is, of course, supported by the good: once proud conscientious objectors with “dead pants” are now just as committed to the good cause as those who are now shamefully abandoning their slogans of “Never again war and no weapons in crisis areas” and apologizing for the détente policy à la Brandt and Palme.
- Our cause is not negotiable, because otherwise we would be giving up freedom and human dignity…
- …and that is why there can be no doubt about it: freedom of expression ends with disinformation; there is no right to be wrong here, because there can only be systematic disinformation.
Well, there are also other cases. You remember the Tonkin incident, which never happened but claimed around four million lives? Or the brazen incubator lie, the invented weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the concentration camps in the stadium in Pristina, and the massacre in Račak … The warmongering “reporting” of the Münchner Neueste Nachrichten on August 3, 1914, about a French ‘attack’ on Nuremberg, which was supposed to ensure that World War I actually broke out, is also “nice.” The Münchner Neueste Nachrichten, the predecessor of the Süddeutsche Zeitung, which today, of course, takes a completely different line.
Let’s just compare how the quality media reported on wars and conflicts in the past when it came to “our” wars, namely those fought with the participation of NATO or one of its member states. Everyone can then decide for themselves how they view the war between Russia and Ukraine or Israel’s warfare in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon.
And then, when the enthusiasm for war subsides somewhat and the willingness to make peace “despite everything” increases, reports emerge of brutal, barbaric incidents intended to discredit the enemy as incapable of peace. You remember Bucha, the massacres committed by ISIS, the poison gas attacks by the Syrians, or the Hamas raid. No sooner was there a glimmer of détente in sight than large holes were blown in the best-guarded border, enabling horrific acts to be committed, which are then reported in the relevant media. Strangely enough, it is usually those who advocate a compromise who are targeted.
So there is no trace of propaganda? Yes, there is, but only on the part of the enemy. Their journalists engage in propaganda and disinformation and are led by a power-hungry monster—which, incidentally, is not a conspiracy theory, but the pure truth and nothing but the truth. The ten guiding principles help to expose the enemy’s propaganda. Because we love the truth and fight for good (see points 1, 4, and 9—and 10, of course).
But if the first casualty of war is truth, who benefits from untruth? Politics? Hmm, and probably also those who write and broadcast about it in such a way that the truth falls by the wayside.
But I’m probably falling for enemy propaganda and am — without wanting to or realizing it — one of Putin’s trolls and an anti-Semite?! I apologize for this in advance, freely adapted from Locas in Love: But it wasn’t me. It was Mabuse. He used my brain.
Sources and notes:
(1) As a motto preceding the book and supplemented, among other things, with a German couplet: “When war comes to the country / Lies are as plentiful as sand”: Falsehood in War-Time, Containing an Assortment of Lies Circulated Throughout The Nations During The Great War, 1940, page 5.
(2) Anne Morelli, Principes élémentaires de propagande de guerre. Utilisables en cas de guerre froide, chaude ou tiède, 2001; English: Principles of War Propaganda, 2014.
(3) So said the telegenic “political scientist and futurologist” – oh poor future – Florence Gaub on April 12, 2022, on Marcus Lanz’s show on ZDF. Marcus Lanz thinks that’s worth a “hmm.” But she really knows, because she works (?) as research director at the NATO Military Academy – what a world we live in: Stand still and listen!
(4) Hofreiter and his colleagues, for example, here: https://www.morgenpost.de/politik/article241552048/Putins-Panzer-Pleite-So-werden-Kuehlschraenke-zu-Ersatzteilen.html
Heinrich Leitner, born in 1958, taught philosophy for more than ten years, including at the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, before moving into IT. Most recently, he worked in IT management for a large federal agency. He has now been back in the world of philosophy for several years and runs the website Philosophisches zur Zeit (Philosophical Thoughts on Current Affairs).