Americans who didn't like their own propaganda

[lpetrich]

Hiding America From Americans – Douglas Rushkoff – Medium by Douglas Rushkoff

Until quite recently, films like 1954’s Abstract in Concrete were banned for American viewers. Although produced with U.S. tax dollars, this cinematic interpretation of the lights of Times Square was meant for European consumption only. Like the rest of the art and culture exported by the United States Information Agency, Abstract in Concrete was part of a propaganda effort to make our country look more free, open, and tolerant than many of us preceived or even wanted it to be. In the mid-1940’s, when conservative members Congress got wind of the progressive image of America we were projecting abroad, they almost cut the USIA’s funding, potentially reducing America’s global influence.

That video: Times Square: "Abstract in Concrete" 1954 United States Information Agency (USIA) - YouTube -- lots of video of New York City's Times Square at night, including reflections of its lights on wet streets.

Well, America today is in no danger of projecting too free, open, or tolerant a picture of itself to the world. But I’m starting to wonder if maybe the nationalist, xenophobic, inward-turned America on display to the world these days might just be the real us — the real U.S. Maybe the propaganda we created to make ourselves look like the leading proponents of global collaboration and harmony was just that: propaganda.

For nearly a century after its founding, the United States did not meddle much in lands far beyond its boundaries. The US's first President, George Washington, warned against foreign involvements in his Farewell Address, though an exception occurred soon after: Thomas Jefferson sent some expeditions to punish some Barbary Pirates who had been raiding American shipping.

That changed in 1898 with the Spanish-American War, where the US seized Cuba and the Philippines from Spain. The US got into transoceanic imperialism very late, missing out on Africa during the Europeans' dividing up of that continent in the late 19th cy. President Woodrow Wilson started out by saying that the US was "too proud to fight" in WWI, but he got the US into it, stating that "The world must be made safe for democracy." He proposed a world order presided over by an international organization, the League of Nations, but the US was burned out of big military adventures, and never joined.

This isolationism lasted until WWII, when the US helped defeat the Axis powers, and ended up confronting the Soviet Union in the Cold War. That led to the US starting a propaganda campaign meant to show what a great nation it is. But great in what way?

... I grew up in the 1970s, at the height of America’s cultural outreach to Europe and the world. I remember how great Russian artists and ballet dancers would come to New York, and how American artists and writers would go to Europe. There were exchange students in my high school from Italy, France, and Germany. The outside world — the international society of musicians, writers, thinkers that America was fostering— seemed more artistic, cultural, and tolerant than what I knew here, at home. It seemed like the future.

This was by design, and part of a propaganda effort that began in the 1940's. Once the USSR and the U.S. divided Europe into East and West and the Cold War began, America went on a propaganda effort to present itself as more enlightened and free than the communists. The State Department, the CIA, and the United States Information Agency, as well as an assortment of foundations from Rockefeller’s to Fulbright’s, all dedicated themselves to painting a positive picture of America abroad. This was big money; by the late 1950’s the USIA alone spent over $2 billion of public money a year on newsreels, radio broadcasts, journalism, and international appearances and exhibitions. This included everything from Paris Review articles to Dizzy Gillespie concerts.

... So, abstract art exhibits and films, book collections with modernist novels, intellectuals, people of color, modern dancers, and all sorts of avant-garde culture was sent for consumption abroad.

But many Americans did not like that image that these agencies projected. The Left may have objected that this was prettifying the US, but the Right had a very different criticism (Selling the American Way | Laura A. Belmonte).

Conservative Americans, as well as the senators who represented them, saw this stuff as gay, communist, Jewish, urban, effete, and an altogether terrible misrepresentation of who we were and what we stood for. Why, they asked, should we be spending upwards of two billion dollars exporting decadent, self-indulgent art and culture to the world?

They reached a compromise: the Smith-Mundt Act in 1948 forbade the release of any of the USIA's propaganda inside the US itself.

That kept many Americans from getting outraged at what the USIA was presenting to the rest of the world as what the US is like.

The Smith-Mundt Act was repealed in the 2012, because the Internet had made international borders too porous.

DR concludes:

I wonder: was the Smith-Mundt Act hiding an internationalist and open-minded America from the few Americans who weren’t ready for it? Or was it simply hiding the nationalist and backwards-thinking America from the world? For all our efforts at telling Europe otherwise, maybe we are not really the modern society we self-styled proponents of public diplomacy like to think we are.

 

[lpetrich]

So this image of the US was like an idealized version of "blue America": urbanized, multicultural, cosmopolitan. Their opponents represented a stereotypical version of "red America", provincial, xenophobic, closed-minded, and proud of all those things.

The current standardbearer of "red America" is Donald Trump, and he often seems like the opposite of much of it. He comes from a big city and he likes to live in big cities. His closest approach to wilderness is his golf courses. He has had some big business dealings from people in other nations, and some of his partners abroad could well have bailed him out -- for a price. His daughter Ivanka is involved in high fashion, and some of his properties are rather ostentatiously decorated. Etc.

 

[ruby sparks]

Interesting read. Thanks for posting.

As a European, I can say that I have always viewed the USA as a mixture, often of two extremes. Yes, parts of it are cosmopolitan and modern, but other parts aren't.

I got most of my early impressions via tv and movies, which probably weren't realistic and may have been skewed towards representing the modern/cosmopolitan side of things.

 

[DrZoidberg]

It's hard to exaggerate how incredibly weak the early USA was. They barely had any tax revenue. The right to bear arms and the militia was put in place simply because the US government didn't have the resources to protect it's citizens. Not meddling in other countries was just smart.

It wasn't until after the civil war USA got their act together and started resembling a modern state with some muscle behind their words. Which is why they started meddling in 1889. They did it then because it was the first time they could without risking the entire USA breaking apart.

I recommend reading about the First and Second Barbary war in 1801. USA vs the Ottomans. The Americans were a scrappy lot. The entire US navy was six warships. All of which were used against the Tripolitanians leaving USA undefended. It'll give an insight into how incredibly weak early USA was. After the American revolution the US government had to sell their entire navy because they couldn't afford to keep a single ship afloat. Not even the historically significant frigate Alliance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Barbary_War

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Barbary_War

 

[untermensche]

...For nearly a century after its founding, the United States did not meddle much in lands far beyond its boundaries. The US's first President, George Washington, warned against foreign involvements in his Farewell Address, though an exception occurred soon after: Thomas Jefferson sent some expeditions to punish some Barbary Pirates who had been raiding American shipping...

Did not meddle in lands beyond it's borders?

It attacked and killed and took what was available.

It did not have much of a Navy and it was not very powerful so it had to limit it's meddling to the Western Hemisphere.

But the desire to meddle was there. That was imported from Europe.

 

[BH]

I used to work with a lady who emigrated from Russia after the USSR fell apart. She actually talked about some of the stuff she read and saw on tv made by those supporting the USSR switching to our economic system. She said these tv shows took people holding typical jobs like janitor, retail clerk, ect and showed them living in huge homes and driving not one but having two cars. Basically, the propaganda was arguing American workers, even those with low skills, were living like kings and queens. She moved over here to get away from the rot after it all fell apart. Her son was a brain surgeon and could not get work that paid him so he got a work visa over here. As part of the deal he could get mom one so she would not be left alone.

Needless to say, she found out for sure that all that stuff about America was crap. She said she was very bitter at all the lies told about the US and how good it was. She herself was sceptical but lots of folks fell for it hook line and sinker. If it wasn't for her son helping her out and being close to him she would not want to have stayed.

I can't find any of these propaganda videos on Youtube or works in print and the law saying it could not be show to Americans, if these films and such were actually made or fronted by us, explains why. I've heard that type of stuff was out there though before meeting my Russian friend.

 

[barbos]

Interesting, but what would be the purpose of these movies? You could not show them in USSR&Co. Western Europe was the target? what for?

 

[lpetrich]

It's hard to exaggerate how incredibly weak the early USA was. They barely had any tax revenue. The right to bear arms and the militia was put in place simply because the US government didn't have the resources to protect it's citizens. Not meddling in other countries was just smart.

When George Washington suppressed the Whiskey Rebellion, a revolt against a tax on whiskey, he recruited some soldiers from some state militias. The US didn't get a permanent standing army until after the War of 1812, IIRC.

It wasn't until after the civil war USA got their act together and started resembling a modern state with some muscle behind their words. Which is why they started meddling in 1889. They did it then because it was the first time they could without risking the entire USA breaking apart.

I suspect that at least part of that becoming a modern state was for mobilizing and supporting the armies that were involved in that war.

Historian Peter Klingberg has proposed an interesting cyclic theory of US foreign involvements, a cycle of alternation between extroversion and introversion (source: an Arthur Schlesinger Jr. book on US history cycles). Introversion is lack of interest in foreign involvements. It ends from unmet challenges from abroad, whether real or perceived, and the nation becomes extroverted. That is willingness to get involved abroad, and it ends from burnout from some big war. Thus making the nation introverted again.

The US started its existence rather introverted, but became extroverted as a result of the undeclared French naval war and the Barbary pirates' attacking American shipping. This period included buying the Louisiana Purchase, and ended with the War of 1812.

This started an introverted period where the US did not help some revolting Canadians in the early 1830's, and were not sure about annexing Texas. Also then was Andrew Jackson vs. South Carolina about some tariffs and the state's revoking them. This led to an extroverted period when the US made a deal with Britain about the Oregon Territory, and also conquered the northern half of Mexico. It ended in the Civil War, and the US passed on the Scramble for Africa in the 1880's and 1890's.

Then the US started getting extroverted again, conquering Cuba and the Philippines, building the Panama Canal, and getting involved with WWI. Despite victory in that war, involvement in that war nevertheless caused a burnout and an era of isolationism -- introversion. The US did not join the League of Nations, making it much less effective.

That era's end can be very precisely dated: December 7, 1941. That is when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, provoking the US's full-scale involvement in WWII. But that era was already starting to end, with FDR's military buildup and Lend-Lease aid to Britain. Those actions were opposed by "America First" isolationists, but after Pearl Harbor, they shut up and disbanded. A day after the attack, FDR addressed Congress, calling the day of the attack "a date which will live in infamy". Congress then voted to declare war on Japan, with only one dissent. Jeannette Rankin voted against it, because she wanted to make a statement about war being a Bad Thing. FDR signed that declaration the next day.

Though WWII required major mobilization, it was nevertheless a complete victory over the Axis powers. Their lands were occupied and their leaders deposed, though Adolf Hitler committed suicide in his bunker and the US allowed Japan's Emperor to stay in power. The US stayed extroverted, and helped found League of Nations II: the United Nations. To this day, it remains headquartered in New York City, the US's largest and arguably most cosmopolitan city. The US also helped found some international financial institutions, the World Bank and the International Monetary fund, and it also helped start the Bretton Woods system of international monetary-system management.

There was a fly in this ointment, a serpent in this paradise. Germany was occupied by its conquerors, the US, Britain, France, and the Soviet Union, but the Soviet Union did not get along well with the others, especially after it showed a strong desire to dominate eastern Europe and support fellow Communists there. Josip Broz Tito, a Communist who ended up taking over Yugoslavia, decided that he didn't want to be a lackey of the Soviet Union. Though Stalin supposedly stated "I will shake my little finger and there will be no more Tito", he decided against trying to conquer Yugoslavia. Europe became divided between Western and Soviet-dominated areas, with Germany divided in two and Berlin also.

The Cold War had started, and the US formed an alliance with most of the Western European nations: NATO. It also formed SEATO in southeast Asia and CENTO in the Middle East, but they were not as successful as NATO. There was surprisingly little Cold-War fighting in Europe, mostly the Soviet Union suppressing rebellions in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Poland. Most of it took place elsewhere, with the United States and the Soviet Union supporting nations that they considered to be friends.

The US's willingness to fight Communism got it into the Korean War, and later the Vietnam War. The Korean War was almost a victory for the US, South Korea, and their friends, but Communist China sent in a huge army and pushed them out of North Korea. The two sides then agreed to end fighting, even if not the hostility. The Vietnam War was worse, with the US trying to prop up a rather unsavory regime in South Vietnam and seemingly unwilling to do much more than bomb North Vietnam. Then again, Communist China was right next door.

That war was a big turn-off for many Americans, and the US became somewhat introverted, trying to lessen confrontation with the Soviet Union and Communist China -- detente. Ronald Reagan was an international extrovert, and he grumbled about "Vietnam syndrome" -- introversion. But his administration never did much more than aid opponents of the Soviet bloc.

With the presidency of his successor George Bush I, the US became more extroverted, sending lots of troops to liberate Kuwait, and then getting involved in the "War on Terror" in Afghanistan and Iraq. But the US seems to have become more introverted, with lots of drone warfare and Obama "leading from behind" in Libya.

I recommend reading about the First and Second Barbary war in 1801. USA vs the Ottomans. The Americans were a scrappy lot. The entire US navy was six warships. All of which were used against the Tripolitanians leaving USA undefended. It'll give an insight into how incredibly weak early USA was. After the American revolution the US government had to sell their entire navy because they couldn't afford to keep a single ship afloat. Not even the historically significant frigate Alliance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Barbary_War

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Barbary_War

One of them, the Philadelphia, went aground there, and its crew decided to destroy it rather than let the Pasha of Tripoli get a big prize. So it never returned.

 

[BH]

Interesting, but what would be the purpose of these movies? You could not show them in USSR&Co. Western Europe was the target? what for?

I don't know how she saw them. She did not tell me.

 

[skepticalbip]

Interesting read. Thanks for posting.

As a European, I can say that I have always viewed the USA as a mixture, often of two extremes. Yes, parts of it are cosmopolitan and modern, but other parts aren't.

I got most of my early impressions via tv and movies, which probably weren't realistic and may have been skewed towards representing the modern/cosmopolitan side of things.

Your impression was pretty much what I found many Japanese think the US is. They have a general impression of metropolitan areas with gangsters and cops shooting at each other. Then between the large metropolitan areas there were cowboys and Indians shooting at each other.

OK that is a little exaggerated but not by a great deal.

 

[skepticalbip]

Interesting, but what would be the purpose of these movies? You could not show them in USSR&Co. Western Europe was the target? what for?

I don't know how she saw them. She did not tell me.

Probably films smuggled in. I understand that there was also a big black market demand for hand-held calculators and Levi Jeans smuggled in.

 

[barbos]

Interesting, but what would be the purpose of these movies? You could not show them in USSR&Co. Western Europe was the target? what for?

I don't know how she saw them. She did not tell me.

Probably films smuggled in. I understand that there was also a big black market demand for hand-held calculators and Levi Jeans smuggled in.

well, calculators and Jeans have some practical value for ordinary people, esoteric art propaganda nor so much.
Plus I don't see many people being able to afford equipment for watching these films (these were literally films)

 

[barbos]

Interesting, but what would be the purpose of these movies? You could not show them in USSR&Co. Western Europe was the target? what for?

I doubt she saw them, especially in the 80s. In the late 80s market was open for everything already and economy was so bad that there was no need need to spend any money on propaganda. For a soviet person from the 70s-80s biggest contrast between USSR and West was the fact you can simply go buy anything at any time and what you buy would not be crap. Soviet economy was not good at anything other than weapons.

 

[lpetrich]

Interesting, but what would be the purpose of these movies? You could not show them in USSR&Co. Western Europe was the target? what for?

Making the United States seem like a very admirable nation, one very worth allying with. Otherwise, the US would find it difficult to maintain alliances with other nations. Half of Europeans would become convinced that the US was not willing to risk Chicago to save Hamburg, and the other half of Europeans would become convinced that the US was willing to risk Hamburg to save Chicago.

The former half is like what the "America First" movement wanted, and the latter half was used as a strategy by the Communist Chinese during WWII -- they let the Nationalist Chinese do most of the fighting of the Japanese. Then after Japan was defeated, they defeated the Nationalists, driving them into Taiwan.

 

[lpetrich]

I got most of my early impressions via tv and movies, which probably weren't realistic and may have been skewed towards representing the modern/cosmopolitan side of things.

I wouldn't be surprised. It requires both technology and artistry to make movies and TV shows, and both are easiest to create and maintain in big cities.

I once wrote a story in which some observers of us Earthlings joke that the Earth looks like Los Angeles.

 

[bilby]

Interesting, but what would be the purpose of these movies? You could not show them in USSR&Co. Western Europe was the target? what for?

I don't know how she saw them. She did not tell me.

Probably films smuggled in. I understand that there was also a big black market demand for hand-held calculators and Levi Jeans smuggled in.

Soft toilet paper; Windscreen wiper blades; and bath plugs, were big ticket black imports.

My dad was part of an international scientific knowledge sharing group in the 1970s and 80s. He traveled to various Warsaw Pact countries, including the USSR, and we had various eastern bloc scientists staying with us during that period.

Those were the three most popular things they wanted to take home.