Propaganda 102 Supplemental: Get ‘Em Young

KKK Logo

by Gene Howington, Guest Blogger

There is nothing more malleable than the mind of a child. Their minds are like sponges, absorbing everything they come in contact with. Previously, we’ve discussed the power of moving images as propaganda, including propaganda aimed at children. Film and video can also be used to educate as illustrated by excellent children’s programs such as Sesame Street. The benefits of this technology in that regard is unquestionable. But what happens when education becomes indoctrination? What happens when the lessons taught are hatred and intolerance? Does this cross the line from education into political propaganda?  A recent story raises this very issue and others.

“The Andrew Show” is a crudely produced show viewable on YouTube.  It’s not just crude in the sense of production values, although it is that. It is crude in content as well.  Subtitled “A Show For White Kids”, the show promotes the White Supremacist views of the Ku Klux Klan.  This is no surprise considering the young host of the show is Andrew Pendergraft, the grandson of Thomas Robb.  If you don’t know Robb by name, he’s the National Director for the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan and Pastor of the Christian Revival Center.

I invite you to look for yourself at some of the videos below and ask yourself should there be additional limits to political free speech?

To save bandwidth, I only embedded a single video here.  To see the full playlist of videos, use the “Watch on YouTube” option in at the bottom right side of the embedded player. Videos were still being added to the series as recently as April of this year.

This story also raises other issues. When does propaganda become child abuse? Raising a child to have such socially intolerant racial views is not preparing him for success in the real world where living and working with people of different races and creeds is a given. But is it grounds to interfere with custody?  We’ve seen stories before about parents losing custody of their children for giving them Nazi names. The production of this show not only arguably is a disservice to this child, but to any child who watches it. It is, however, political free speech. Free speech comes with consequences and duties and has recognized reasonable exceptions at law such as defamation, incitement, and threats. While these videos are certainly disturbing, they don’t rise to the level of the current exceptions and are clearly protected political free speech. Political free speech is a paramount concern for protection and at the heart of the Founder’s desire to protect the ability of the public to dissent. With the noted exceptions to free speech in general, I don’t think anyone should be stopped from expressing a political view simply because it is unpopular or distasteful. Bad ideas will be sorted out in the marketplace of ideas so long as political free speech is protected and debate encouraged. However, when the issue is children, you are not just shaping the minds of the young, you are shaping the future.  A responsible society protects its weakest most vulnerable members and no category of human is more vulnerable than children. Human children are require a huge investment to be shepherded into adulthood compared to most other species.

How far should we go to protect that investment?  How far can we reasonably go to protect that investment and protect other valid concerns like liberties and freedoms? Including the right to raise your children as you see fit? Is ill-equipping a child for survival in life as damaging as incitement or a threat?

When do unpopular political views cross the line into being directly damaging to others?

Should society limit political free speech by exception, no matter how heinous or unpopular, when children are involved?

Can such a restriction ever be reasonable?

Keep in mind that anything that can be learned can be unlearned.

What do you think?

Source(s): Huffington Post, YouTube, Wikipedia

The Propaganda Series;
Propaganda 105: How to Spot a Liar
Propaganda 104 Supplemental: The Streisand Effect and the Political Question
Propaganda 104 Supplemental: The Sound of Silence
Propaganda 104: Magica Verba Est Scientia Et Ars Es
Propaganda 103: The Word Changes, The Word Remains The Same
Propaganda 102 Supplemental: Holly Would “Zero Dark Thirty”
Propaganda 102: Holly Would and the Power of Images
Propaganda 101 Supplemental: Child’s Play
Propaganda 101 Supplemental: Build It And They Will Come (Around)
Propaganda 101: What You Need to Know and Why or . . .

Related articles of interest;

Mythology and the New Feudalism by Mike Spindell
How about Some Government Propaganda for the People Paid for by the People Being Propagandized? by Elaine Magliaro
Is Freedom of the Press Dead? by Lawrence E. Rafferty

~submitted by Gene Howington, Guest Blogger

55 thoughts on “Propaganda 102 Supplemental: Get ‘Em Young”

  1. >b>Jill 1, July 8, 2013 at 8:31 am

    “In the past, psychological operations usually meant dropping leaflets or broadcasting propaganda on the battlefield. Today, the military is more focused on manipulating news and commentary on the Internet,…”

    Let’s not forget that Operation Mockingbird was an assault to take over control of the media.

  2. I’ve always said that the best way to deal with a pathetic bigot is to let him squawk his garbage and let him make an idiot out of himself. Using force to shut an unpopular belief down only makes the person preaching the unpopular belief stronger.

    As for using kids in this type of stuff to me does not classify as child abuse. Kids who are taught hate by their bigot parents eventually will end up having to chance later in life. As said in the article, being a bigot doesn’t do well when your on your own. Stuff like this also enforces the belief that race hatred or hate for that matter is taught (see the movie White Dog)

  3. “In the past, psychological operations usually meant dropping leaflets or broadcasting propaganda on the battlefield. Today, the military is more focused on manipulating news and commentary on the Internet,…”

    Yes, the Pentagon would never advocate goals such as killing or breaking the law or anything bad like those evil people in the KKK. Liberals, wake the hell up!

  4. Otteray Scribe 1, July 7, 2013 at 3:07 pm

    … all forms of child abuse have a psychological or emotional damage component. PTSD and other emotional disorders are common among adults who were abused children.
    Maybe that is the way to judge the case in the post.

    If competent psychologists and/or psychiatrists can say under oath and demonstrate via testing the presence of abuse, and tie it to the hate mongering, why not intervention of some sort to protect the child?

  5. free speech means free speech. that right is most important when you don’t agree with what’s being spoken.

    (cue gratuitous musical reference)

  6. You’re right Darren…. David Duke from Louisiana was a GOP but was a known NAZI…..

  7. AY:

    The Communist Party is banned in Washington State.

    RCW 9.81.083

    Communist party declared a subversive organization.

    The Communist party is a subversive organization within the purview of chapter 9.81 RCW and membership in the Communist party is a subversive activity thereunder.

    [1955 c 377 § 4.]

    And also ….

    RCW 9.81.040

    Disqualification from voting or holding public office.

    Any person who shall be convicted or shall plead guilty of violating any of the provisions of RCW 9.81.020 and 9.81.030, in addition to all other penalties therein provided, shall from the date of such conviction be barred from

    (1) Holding any office, elective or appointive, or any other position of profit or trust in, or employment by the government of the state of Washington or of any agency thereof or of any county, municipal corporation or other political subdivision of said state;

    (2) Filing or standing for election to any public office in the state of Washington; or

    (3) Voting in any election held in this state.

    [1951 c 254 § 4.]

  8. I don’t know why you’d want to start here… You may not like it and I may not like it…. But it does exist… If you start limiting this type of speech what will be next…. Oh…. Banning nazis from running for elected office under the nazi platform….. Hmmm… How about banning communist from running for office in the US?

  9. OS,

    That Lafayette councilman is either engaging in that old/tired divide & conquer strategy for political gain, as most polecats do, or he’s just another fool aiding the same.

    I’m not gay & I don’t want to watch, but not once have gays been any kind of problem to me & my family around here.

    I’ve know a few & done jobs for them & never an issue.

  10. The best way to deal with videos such as this is to pay them no mind. There is always going to be one racist no matter how enlightened the populace. He can either be relegated to the noise of the background or we can censor everyone for ever arbitrary reason.

    Unless there is a real case of abuse I don’t see it here. But it is certainly shameful to have a boy talk like this.

  11. OS,
    I agree that the Lafayette councilman does need a lesson or two in what it means to be an American.

  12. RE: “Covert Incest.”
    I just worked on a case where that was an issue, and have a huge amount of material on it, including two books. So, it is fresh on my mind.

    Covert incest is a term of art, referring to a type of pseudosexual enmeshment between parent and child. It falls into a grey area where it is not full-blown incest, but can be classified as borderline sexual abuse at a minimum.

    Having said that, I neglected to mention that all forms of child abuse have a psychological or emotional damage component. PTSD and other emotional disorders are common among adults who were abused children.

  13. A Lafayette, LA councilman is working with the city attorney in drafting an ordnance that would ban the rainbow colored “Gay Pride” flag on city property. He says he fought in the military (Korea) for our country, and did not want to come home to, “…something like that.”

    Somebody needs to explain that the Constitution is our country to Councilman Green. And that the First Amendment is one of the most important parts of that Constitution.

    Story here:

  14. Leslie, Very good point. We adopted our son from Colombia and live in a pretty white neighborhood. We told him he would be called names. But, we also told him for every person who calls you “spic” “wetback,” etc. to your face, there are many more who say it behind your back. At least you know where you stand w/ the person who says it to your face.

Comments are closed.