On Tyranny Lesson 10: Believe in truth

Nazis excelled at propaganda by using it to push forth their ideology by demonizing the enemies of their party (Jews, communists, capitalists, intellectuals). They used radio, large rallies, pamphlets, posters, movies, etc. to spread the message. One way, Hitler kept himself present in the minds of all Germans every day was requiring that the Nazi salute be used as a public greeting and that the salutation be accompanied with “Heil Hitler.” It helped maintain the cult of personality around Hitler.

Political parties (tyrannical regimes among them) now have powerful tools to spread their messaging and propaganda. Through television, social media, SMS messaging, email, and more, they can amplify their messaging and permeate nearly every aspect of our lives. Technology allows them to maintain a constant presence, shaping perceptions and influencing behaviour…if we let them.

tRump differs from past presidents in how he communicates directly with his supporters. His office frequently emails followers, promoting merchandise and reinforcing his messaging. He also posts directly to Truth Social, where his statements are widely shared across other social media platforms and picked up by mainstream news outlets, further expanding his reach. Many celebrities benefit from social media because it allows them to connect directly with their fans. This immediacy makes followers feel special — as if they have a personal connection and are part of the celebrity’s life. tRump understands the power of these platforms to persuade, influence, and build trust with his supporters.

He’s not alone — other world leaders are using social media to cultivate dedicated followings. For example, Narendra Modi has the most followers on Instagram in India, while Elon Musk holds the top spot on X. An MIT study titled “Cheap Tweets?: Crisis Signaling in the Age of Twitter” found that social media posts from leaders are often taken just as seriously as official statements, underscoring the power these platforms have in shaping public perception. So there’s a dual power for leaders on these platforms. It not only helps their own “cults of personality” but it also sends out official party messages.

In a post-truth world — or perhaps we should call it a “tRump-truth” world — facts are increasingly becoming irrelevant. The truth is inconvenient to those in power, so efforts are increased to suppress it, obscure it, and contradict it. In these times of rampant disinformation, it’s more important than ever not only to believe in truth but to actively seek it, recognize it when you see it, and understand it. As for combatting it Jane R outlined some great tips here: https://www.bookclubfriends.com/2025/02/24/fighting-disinformation/.

I also think providing concrete visuals to people can be very helpful in countering the often emotive and vague messaging around propaganda. For example, I noted that when fentanyl from Canada has been discussed we have it being presented differently by the leaders. In addressing Congress recently tRump said: Mexico and Canada “have allowed fentanyl to come into our country at levels never seen before, killing hundreds of thousands of our citizens and many very young, beautiful people, destroying families. Nobody’s ever seen anything like it.” Notice how emotive his language is (killing and destroying families), and how vague and alarmist (levels never seen before, nobody’s ever seen anything like it), and how provocative (the countries have “allowed” it to come in…to kill Americans.)

Former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said in response that smuggling from Canada contributes less than 1% of the fentanyl street supply in the U.S. That’s factual, yes but it is also vague. Personally, I don’t know what the total street supply is so I can’t attribute an amount to the 1%. It also doesn’t tell me how many people this amount can potentially harm. I’m not left with a clear visual.

Then there’s the facts and figures from the DEA. In 2024 they reported seizing 20,610 pounds of fentanyl at official ports of entry along the Southwest U.S. border, compared to just 50 pounds seized at the Northern border.(source: https://usafacts.org/answers/how-much-fentanyl-is-seized-at-us-borders/country/united-states/). These facts help me visualize more clearly the scope of the problem in comparison to Mexico and gives me a concrete visual of how much.

The reason I have outlined the three different messages around fentanyl is to point out how visual tRump’s language is in comparison to facts. Yet facts can be improved with visual aids, whether it be through better wording or through charts and infographics. Visualization of facts could be a tool to try against propaganda. That’s in part I think because people process visuals quickly.

One of the points Jane R mentions is building supportive communities and connections. I think this is a big one too and would encourage connecting with people face-to-face. I strongly believe real-life interactions will help counterbalance the false realities circulating online.

“Fascists despised the small truths of daily existence, loved slogans that resonated like a new religion, and preferred creative myths to history or journalism. They used new media, which at the time was radio, to create a drumbeat of propaganda that aroused feelings before people had time to ascertain facts.” – Chapter 10, “On Tyranny”

In the fall of 1919, Hitler joined the German Workers’ Party, where he was put in charge of propaganda. He was the 55th member, but designated “party comrade 555” to give the impression that the party was much larger than it was. He had an understanding of marketing and how to appeal to people and, without any changes to the party’s platform, changed the name of the party to “National Socialist German Workers Party” – or Nazis – simply to appeal to the left. He was referred to as “the drummer”, the party’s public voice and best asset. Now recognized as a mesmerizing orator, he used simple words and didn’t hesitate to tell what he later described as “colossal untruths”.

By criticizing mainstream politicians for ignoring the needs of the common people and promising to “fulfill the fatherland’s destiny,” Hitler gained popularity with unhappy voters in 1930 as the population felt the effects of the Great Depression. He thought that most people desired faith in something and were not intellectually capable of debating the object of their faith, so he reduced issues into simple terms that led to the thinking that the many sources of their problems were caused by a single adversary. He explained, “either the victory of the Aryan side or its annihilation and the victory of the Jews.” The citizens of the Reich were inundated with propaganda at the workplace, in public rallies and over radio, the Internet of the 30s. Hitler’s shameless lies were taken as truths because he was a genius at reading a crowd and modulating his message accordingly. With Hitler, Mussolini and many other dictators, we see that charm and performance are much more effective than rational thought and reality.

Today, propaganda is much more difficult to identify due to advancements in technology. However, it is very clearly present and extremely effective, as evidenced in the way it has created alternate realities for different groups of citizens within a society, thus enabling the division of that society, destroying democracies and allowing dictatorships to come to power. Both traditional and social media push disinformation, changing how people feel, behave and vote.

With traditional media, ownership of the media source often indicates how information is presented. With social media, sources of disinformation are not as evident, yet just as influential. Tech enables platforms to manipulate information, presenting some pieces more strongly and completely hiding other pieces in other cases. Tech can also manipulate the appearance of popularity, which influences how information in consumed and accepted. Social media platforms are not regulated; though ownership of the platform informs how facts and disinformation are presented.

We tend to trust information when it’s delivered by friends and family on social media platforms, but individuals are far more easily manipulated than institutions, which have standards and ethics and may be legally liable for spreading misinformation. This is where discerning fact from fiction becomes more difficult, and more dangerous. When one cannot distinguish fact from fiction, then we have no facts. “When you have no facts the only government that can survive is a dictatorship.” – Maria Ressa, Mar. 6, 2025

Current strategies on combatting propaganda and disinformation include long-term solutions such as education. Medium term solutions include regulation of social media platforms and other sources of disinformation.

What we can do today is limit or completely boycott platforms that are used to spread propaganda. Also suggested is collaboration amongst those of us who are able to identify disinformation and propaganda – we can work together to identify opportunities to combat disinformation. I believe one possibility is to learn more about disinformation campaigns and how to combat them. This may help not only to inoculate ourselves from falling victim to disinformation campaigns, but it may also lends us the opportunity to apply this knowledge to others if we are in the position to do so. We can also share this knowledge with other resistors and ask that they share this important information as well.

Snyder describes a process used by Hitler and the Nazis which is essentially the playbook of the current U.S. administration; lie and repeat is so often and in so many iterations that people just give up. They either believe it or no longer have the capacity to refute it.

In the U.S. now, there are a significant number of believers but, more concerning to me, a larger group that may simply not have the energy or fortitude or courage to argue. They know what the administration says is a lie but go no farther. I am enormously grateful for all of those who refuse to accept the lies and insist on publishing the truth.

In many ways, social media can be both a disseminator of lies and a source of facts. It depends on where one chooses to look. The challenge is to convince people to consider the source of what they read and any biases of that source. And that is not limited to the national discourse; I see it in communications about local issues in ABQ.

It probably will not happen soon, but I hope that educators will step up to make young readers informed and critical consumers of media. It should be as much a part of education as examining scientific and social-psych research for its flaws and limitations. At least, that is what I found in my experience as a student or consumer of research.