Autonomous Source

« Let's go for a walk! | Main | Sixty years later »

Propaganda? Look who's talking!

I like comic books and computer games. Most of what's produced in both mediums is absolute crap, of course, but there's some great stuff that comes out every now and then that I'd like to be made aware of. The National Post, to it's credit, has reviewers covering new games and comics, just as they do for movies and books. It's too bad the comics reviewer, Jeet Heer, is such an idiot.

Here's how he begins his review (not available on the web) of a collection of anti-American comics:

Propaganda works: That is the distressing lesson we can draw from recent history. Over the last two years, a large majority of Americans (and a significant numbers [sic] of Canadians) have accepted as fact patently untrue things, notably that Saddam Hussein was responsible for the 9/11 attacks, that the Iraqi government had significant ties to al-Qaeda, and that Iraq itself was awash in weapons of mass destruction. These factitious notions were spread either by the U.S. Bush administration or its Neanderthal allies in the right-wing press.
Well. After two years of reading the Neanderthal right-wing press I have not once read any claims that Saddam was responsible for 9/11. But maybe I'm not reading the right crackpots. Certainly the Bush administration never claimed he was -- could you imagine the 'Bush Lied!' crew's hysterics if they had? And I detect some qualifiers to the 'propaganda' Heer's exposing. Does he mean it's 'patently untrue' that the Iraqi government had ties to al-Qaeda, or just that they were 'significant' ties? And while he's certainly right that it's 'patently untrue' that Iraq was 'awash in weapons of mass destruction', no one actually claimed it was. (The sarin gas used recently in a terrorist attack in Iraq and the 20 tons of chemical weapons found in the hands of al-Qaeda in Jordan would hardly have made Iraq 'awash' in the horrible stuff.)

Well, never mind. I'd be able to forgive that (very stupid) opening paragraph if he went on to discuss to book he was reviewing as a work of propaganda as well, just on the other side. After all, pictures with words have been used as propaganda with great success in the past -- and pictures with words is all comics are. They have a tremendous ability to simplify issues and promote a certain viewpoint, which I'm sure this book does.

But no, Heer is unable to even consider this possibly balanced point of view. In the rest of the review, Heer follows the same extreme leftist line, calling Fox News viewers 'simple rubes', praising propagandists Michael Moore and Noam Chomsky, and dropping the names of some obscure left-wing intellectuals (in case you missed how clever he is). The article would fit right in in a typical campus rag. How on earth did it get in the supposed 'right-wing' Canadian national newspaper?