Sunday, September 24, 2017

(5 Parts) Burning History Deceptions and A Teaspoon of Sand or The Art of Lying (On Ken Burns' Propaganda)

Via comment by indyjonesouthere via Maggie's Farm on Attack Cobra & Guns A Go-Go 'Birth Control'


Photo by the author: Confucian Order

Errors or abuses in the pursuit of freedom are not justifications of the abandonment of that pursuit.

Monday’s episode, Riding The Tiger, was wonderfully produced propaganda. It was technically better than episode one, but it was also far more manipulative. I’m trying to be nice here. Other words come to mind. If I did not have a bit of more background info from years of studying and writing about Southeast Asia, Burns would have me convinced that Diem, the autocrat, was far worse to his people than Uncle Ho. Diem, the Catholic strongman ruling a gentle Buddhist nation, cracked down on Buddhist homes of worship. Ho, the sweet old man, who, despite other leaders in his faction having gotten a bit out of hand by murdering between 50,000 and 500,000 of their countrymen, was far more a gentleman. Socialist excesses aside, Ho was beloved, Diem was despised.

Burns is very convincing. I cannot imagine anyone other than those with relatively deep subject knowledge, not being completely taken in by everything shown. We were softly set up by episode one, in episode two the filmmaker skillful weaves the story and sucks us further in. Episode three was worse yet. Those with original sin became narrators crafting stories to forever cover their tracks. Even with some depth of background in the subject, I had to recheck some of my sources to make sure I wouldn’t overstate my case because I found the programming so convincing. After spending hours rereading, my anger at his omissions and skewing of story grew to near rage. My working sub-title for today’s essay was: The Art of Lying. Perhaps I should have retained it.

12 comments:

  1. I wish there were a way to force feed aging academics this material. The reported history on Viet Nam reminds me of the reported history on the Civil war. indyjonesouthere

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The reported history on Viet Nam reminds me of the reported history on the Civil war.

      Yes, he followed his 'Civil War' propaganda well in his 'Vietnam'.

      Delete
  2. Thanks for this very nice introduction to the subject.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, 5 links, but I assume he will have a post for each of the rest.

      Delete
  3. I never got much of a chance to look into Vietnam history but it is nice that falsifying the history is being openly objected to. Too much history nowadays is PC.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Too much history nowadays is PC.

      Is there any that is not in the skools?

      Delete
  4. I knew Burns' work would be heavy on commie sympathy. I did not watch the first few nights but my desire for history won out and I tuned into episode 4 I believe. Our side always talks about our atrocities but never the communists. There are atrocities on all sides in war, show me one where there are not. Then the Viet. Police Col. who executed the vc pos on the street. The commie had just murdered one of his subordinates families, wife, children etc. NOT ONE PEEP FROM "OUR SIDE." Then lamenting comments that maybe we are on the wrong side. 50 years later and they are still lying. Not surprising.
    Kevin

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. NOT ONE PEEP FROM "OUR SIDE."

      ? Here's a search for the General.

      http://tinyurl.com/yaq87y3o

      Delete
    2. Thanks for the refresher. I was getting ready for work this morning and was going from memory and did not have the time to do my due diligence. Thanks, Kevin

      Delete
  5. There are two ways of lying. First is to make a false/untrue statement. The second method of lying is to make a statement that is technically accurate, does by intent omit critical details or is taken out of context.
    Ken Burn's Civil War is an example. There was enough omitted facts to qualify for a rebuttal of equal length to the PBS propaganda.
    As for the second, the statement "I'm going to kick your ass" does mean different things depending on context. It means one thing if said between buddies as they start a round of golf. Same statement has a very different intent when said before a bar fight starts.
    I'm going to waste my time watching this propaganda by Burns.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I lasted 10 minutes on his 'Civil War' and won't even waste one on this.

      Delete