Skip to main content
  1. News
  2. Politics
  3. Government

White House eco-propaganda

See also

Propaganda is the systematic distortion of the truth, usually by government or with a government’s explicit support. Propaganda also involves the systematic exclusion and/or active disparagement of views that are at odds with the government’s goals. By controlling both the news media and the daily government messaging and imaging, the government can attain and maintain rule without fair or loyal opposition. History is replete with government conquest by systematic propaganda: the ancient Greeks and Alexander the Great to defeat the Persians, Rome’s imperial rule of Julius Caesar, the Catholic Church influences in the Middle Ages, the French Jacobins after the 1789 Revolution.

20th century government propaganda became an all-too effective tool for murderous and oppressive totalitarian regimes such as the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany and Communist China. Each made persistent and deadly use of perverse propaganda to control a single government version of government actions and results, including the annihilation of any opposition. (IBD, July 15, 2013)

With the advent of ubiquitous digital media, the reach and immediacy of government propaganda is both more comprehensive and competitive. But even today, no dissenting voices can prevail where mass news media becomes compliant and complicit in central government propaganda.

Pres. Obama’s White House has distinguished itself with a superficial “campaign-styled” executive governance -- dependent upon calculated daily messaging and symbolism to obscure it's mistakes and false promises. He and his propaganda machine benefit massively from a progressive media establishment that has not held him accountable to the executive performance standards of his predecessors. Obama’s recent drop in approval polling is a subtle reflection of the press corps’ beginning to feel some shame after now five years of Obama regime manipulation.

Eco-propaganda is government propaganda that systematically distorts the science of environmental issues, and that excludes and demonizes the views of those at odds with the government’s positions. Last week, Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) spoke on the Senate floor of a typical Obama White House eco-propaganda ploy – produce and disseminate talking points to his eco-group and media allies, academic and partisan progressive governmental operatives to support regulatory items and disparage any opposition.

Climate skeptic Sen. Inhofe presented a White House memo of talking points concerning what began as “global warming,” but has progressively evolved to now be referred to as “carbon pollution.” Carbon pollution (a.k.a., global warming, climate change, extreme weather, etc.) has earned renewed political focus in Obama’s second term – hence, new eco-propaganda is needed. The White House carbon pollution memo advances three cynical strategies:
1. Declare that "we have a moral obligation to future generations to leave them a planet that is not polluted and damaged by carbon pollution.” Their new word to advance climate initiatives is “carbon pollution” because none of the aforementioned derivative terms for global warming has captured the public imagination or political momentum to regulate carbon dioxide as an air pollutant;
2. Declare that “communities all over America are already being harmed by carbon pollution. Climate change is already harming Americans all over the country. Cleaning up after climate-driven disasters last year cost the taxpayer over $100 billion.” These White House “climate-driven disasters” are the estimated some of every U.S. natural disaster of 2012 – including earthquakes, floods, tornadoes, hurricane, wildfire and collateral costs that have no scientific causation with any global warming;
3. The memo falsely associates carbon dioxide that we exhale with every breath with the long-proven health impacts of regulated toxic air pollutants arsenic, mercury and lead – stating “we let (fossil-fueled) power plants release as much carbon pollution as they want. It’s time to set a limit on pollution that affects public health, and that’s why it’s so important that the President is rising to this challenge.” (U.S. Congressional Record, July 10, 2013)

This sort of partisan political propaganda in the area of environmental matters will necessarily be at odds with science, and be intellectually dishonest on its face.
