some propaganda techniques ?

[ArabRebel]

Hello comrades !!
i have been looking -it's been while- for some propaganda techniques to get people to wake up against the king and against capitalism as a whole ... for example just starting from my university, students there just don't give a fuck about anything, as long as they're partying, girls and all that stuff, so i took the mission of waking people up ... i want some suggestions like writing on the university walls, handing out flyers and it would be better if i stay anonymous ... and to illustrate how much the situation is fucked up .. i once took a marker-pen and wrote somethings on the toilet walls like 'the king is a thief' , 'wake up people' the next day, the director came with some police officers and started to 'invastigate' but surely they found no clues ... and from that day until now 4 policemen are always around university ...
i hope i'll get some good suggestions about how to get people to wake up and THINK !

[cyu]

This is more from a psychological / field-work level, rather than specific to leftist politics:

http://www.spring.org.uk/2012/12/why-people-believe-weird-things-and-8-ways-to-change-their-minds.php


people need to hear an alternative account that explains why something happened, not just that the misinformation is wrong. Ideally it should also explain the motivations for the lie.

The shorter it is, the sweeter it will work. Give people too much and they switch off

Don't repeat the myth

You'll have to repeat the myth once, though, so people know what you're talking about. So tell them beforehand that there is misleading information coming.

keep repeating the facts. Each repetition builds up the rebuttal's strength in people's minds. The power of repetition to influence people is clear

Attack the source

You have to keep the audience onside, even if you're telling them things they don't want to hear. You can do this by framing things within the audience's world-view. "Hey, neither of us likes Obama or his politics, but...

get them to affirm their identity. get people to think about things that are important to them like family, friends and ideals. Research suggests this helps people deal with inconsistencies between their beliefs and the new information that is conflicting with it.

all these techniques are already used by opinion-formers and influencers. Correcting misinformation is cognitively indistinguishable from misinforming people

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

students there just don't give a fuck about anything, as long as they're partying, girls and all that stuff, so i took the mission of waking people up ...

Before waking anybody up, you seriously need to check your shit. Women are also students/people, and not a distraction a la "partying".

Also - pop psychology is a poor substitute for creating spaces in which people can reach their on conclusions from a materially different relationship with the existing order. Think of a practical project you can take on - that addresses some pressing lack (cheap food, a "smart" paper, whatever), and organize from that point. Think about what you can learn yourself from the project, and collective engagement with your peers, instead of trying to figure out how you can bestow your of-course-perfect analysis to those damn party-animal plebes [/sarcasm].

[cyu]

From a recent discussion on Facebook:
http://changingminds.org/techniques/propaganda/propaganda.htm

...but for tactics less likely to turn your audience against you, I'd instead recommend various bits of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Win_Friends_and_Influence_People

"Don't criticize, condemn, or complain."
"Give honest and sincere appreciation."
"Make the other person feel important"
"The only way to get the best of an argument is to avoid it."
"Show respect for the other person's opinions. Never say 'You're Wrong.'"
"Let the other person feel the idea is his or hers."
"Begin with praise and honest appreciation."
"Call attention to people's mistakes indirectly."
"Talk about your own mistakes before criticizing the other person."
"Let the other person save face."
"Give the other person a fine reputation to live up to."

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

From a recent discussion on Facebook:
http://changingminds.org/techniques/propaganda/propaganda.htm

...but for tactics less likely to turn your audience against you, I'd instead recommend various bits of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Win_Friends_and_Influence_People

"Don't criticize, condemn, or complain."
"Give honest and sincere appreciation."
"Make the other person feel important"
"The only way to get the best of an argument is to avoid it."
"Show respect for the other person's opinions. Never say 'You're Wrong.'"
"Let the other person feel the idea is his or hers."
"Begin with praise and honest appreciation."
"Call attention to people's mistakes indirectly."
"Talk about your own mistakes before criticizing the other person."
"Let the other person save face."
"Give the other person a fine reputation to live up to."

Tellingly, about half of this could be from Mao's definition of a liberal.

[cyu]

Fact is that nobody likes to have their self-esteem attacked. If you can avoid it, your message is more likely to reach them.

But as mentioned before, this isn't to say revolutions are like dancing with first graders. In general, I would say it is the goal of the propagandist to push their audience towards more revolutionary positions:

If someone is on the side of your opponents, the goal would be to turn them into a neutral party, or someone willing to take a wait-and-see attitude.

If someone is neutral, the goal would be to turn them into a sympathizer or at least someone who knows how to argue your case if playing Devil's advocate.

If somone is a sympathizer, the goal would be to turn them into a more regular supporter.

If someone is a mere "weekend warrior", the goal would be to turn them into solid supporters.

If someone is a solid supporter, the goal would be to make them at least as radical as you are. If you can turn them into other propagandists likely to produce more leftists, all the better.

In some sense, it is like nuclear fission. If a propagandist can turn more people into propagandists, then the resulting chain-reaction would be the social equivalent of a nuclear explosion - that is, a revolution.

[Slavoj Zizek's Balls]

i once took a marker-pen and wrote somethings on the toilet walls like 'the king is a thief' , 'wake up people'

Defacing the university isn't exactly the cleverest way of spreading a message because it shows a lack of finesse. You've got to prove that the radical left is a worthwhile endeavour to yourself first, you need to learn more and you'll need other like-minded individuals who want to do the same. Once you become an authority due to your knowledge, you can then begin to challenge those around you, you can begin to have a reputation as someone who knows what they are talking about.

Now isn't the right time for leaflets. Perhaps contributing to the Learning section and asking questions would be a good idea (search for threads that have your answers first).

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Tellingly, about half of this could be from Mao's definition of a liberal.

If both persons were within a revolutionary party and the one debating the other person showed these traits when arguing, yes, than the person speaking would be called a liberal but seeing as how one person is an unaccounted revolutionary and the other person is non-revolutionary stranger, no, Mao's definition has no water here.

Here is a study guide on the subject: http://www.revleft.com/vb/combat-liberalism-study-t174027/index.html?p=2489627#post2489627

[spok]

Understand your audience and their belief system. Communication is about the transmission of ideas. In order for your preferred ideas to be received, you must first understand how to open a channel of communication and then understand how those ideas square with concepts in the target mind.

There are multiple academic research threads related to "Elective Affinities" and a person's relationship to their beliefs. having a plan before you set out to do something is much more effective than scrawling on bathroom walls.

See: Social Cognition, Vol. 30, No. 6, 2012, pp. 669–688
"Not All Ideologies Are Created Equal: Epistemic, Existential, and Relational Needs PREDICT System-Justifying attitudes"
Eerin P. hennes, h. hannah nam, Chadly Stern, and John T. Jost
New York University