How dissent is managed in a ‘liberal democracy’.

Much is made by politicians and political theorists of the need for ‘active citizens’ in a liberal democracy. The education system is supposed to prepare citizens to scrutinise claims, analyse arguments and check sources of information. We can all then ‘hold to account’ those who aspire to lead us.

That’s the theory, the reality is different. The last thing the leaders of our political parties want is for anyone to seriously question their claims. They agree about nearly everything despite appearances (i.e. theatre) to the contrary. Control is carefully maintained and dissident opinions are carefully filtered out. Censorship operates behind the scenes or under the cover of regulations about not misleading the public. 

The proxy war against Russia conducted through Ukraine and economic and diplomatic means brings this out very clearly. Last month Eamon Dyas explained in Labour Affairs how it was done. All newspapers and broadcasters repeat the same line about Russia’s ‘brutal and barbaric invasion’, repeat Ukrainian claims uncritically, ignore the past history of the conflict and suppress any inconvenient facts about Nazism in Ukraine. Any awkward media sources such as Russia Today are simply taken off the air with a weak excuse about violating communication regulations. Dissident voices on the internet can be and often are removed and sometimes their reputations and finances are trashed as the recent case of Russell Brand makes clear. If necessary they can be imprisoned on trumped up charges as the fate of Julian Assange illustrates all too clearly. Fellow journalists in the mainstream media join in the lying and the slandering. All this is done in a concerted and co-ordinated way. Politicians, media officials and newspaper and internet owners collude to present a unified and carefully controlled narrative. Journalists either believe the nonsense themselves or are too afraid for their jobs to do anything other than toe the official line.

This is very effective. In order to be sceptical about someone’s claims, one needs a lot of time and also ready access to relevant information. Without the information it is impossible to make an independent judgement. So the great majority of citizens are unable to make an objective assessment concerning what is going on between Russia and ‘the West’. Just in case they might be in danger of doing so, the man is played rather than the ball. Dissidents are ‘Putin puppets’ or ‘apologists’ or ‘appeasers’. These insults are continually deployed in order to close down any possibility of dissent. In addition, emotive language rather than reasoned argument is used to create villains out of independently minded statesmen. President Xi of China is a ‘dictator’ who presides over ‘genocide’. President Putin of Russia is a ‘thug’, a ‘poisonous snake’ or a ‘killer’. Playground language, it seems, is very effective in adult life, particularly if it is regularly and continually repeated. This play on the emotions creates a feeling of hostility against anyone who dares to question the consensus. Since they are defending ‘evil’ they must be tainted with evil themselves.

Just in case organisations like ‘No2Nato’ try to inform the public and hold public meetings the trolls spring into action and send death threats to the owners of the venues at which such events are to be held. This too is very effective and leads to the suppression of dissent. Mainstream newspapers and broadcasters do not seem to be at all worried about this.

The truth is that ‘liberal democracy’ fears anything that looks like critical thought. Our political system depends on the appearance of vigorous political conflict between parties which in fact hold almost identical views. They share a common interest in marginalising anyone who points out this inconvenient fact or who proposes something different. The success of this longstanding and ongoing scam depends on careful control and manipulation of the means of communication and dissemination. Great resources, either or the State or of private or corporate wealth, are required to maintain this arrangement. It is simply not in the power of private citizens to seriously reach a mass audience who might be receptive to alternative views. Even the trade unions are intimidated or conned into believing the endless lies and distortions that fuel the management of opinion. Until enough people understand that they are being managed and manipulated this way of managing politics will continue. It is an uphill battle for those who do actually take a critical view of what they are fed. The best trick of all is to maintain the illusion of critical thinking and the encouragement of dissent through painting a false picture of ‘liberal democracy’ reinforced through ‘citizenship education’. 

The fact that such pains are taken to ignore, suppress or destroy dissidents indicates that those who promote these views are actually quite afraid that their game will be revealed. Unfortunately they have until now been successful in concealing it.