I, Propagandist

One of my old GunTruths posters has turned up on the “Classroom Tools” website, along with a dissection of the “propaganda” techniques it employs.

The poster features the infamous AP photo taken during the federal home invasion to snatch Elian Gonzales, along with the caption, "Gun Control: The incomprehensible theory that this guy, and people like him, are the only ones who should be armed."

The analyst draws some conclusions about my intent that reflect much more on what’s going on inside his head than went on in mine. For instance:

5. At whom is it targeted?
Americans fearful of Big Government taking away their "2nd Amendment rights"

While GunTruths was definitely intended to be a resource for Second Amendment activists, the posters (as we stated on their index page) were primarily intended to make “people who support gun control …out of conditioning rather than out of deep conviction” take a closer look at the logical and moral implications of citizen disarmament.

7. In one clear, brief sentence, summarize the message with which you've decided to work.
You need guns to protect yourself against tyranny.

I would actually state this in a different way: A tyranny is the inevitable result of a monopoly of force.

10. Clearly state the behavior or belief the author wants from the target.
The author wants to reinforce the belief of those who already know that governments are tyrannical.

S/he wants these people to continue voting for and contributing to those who promise to protect their "2nd amendment rights".

Ah, no, I wasn’t attempting to “reinforce beliefs” with a poster. What good would that do? I was attempting to call hard evidence to the attention of people who might not have thought of gun control as tyranny-enabling citizen disarmament. And the poster is silent on voting for or contributing to politicians. It’s more elemental than that.

11. Does the message attempt to manipulate with emotion, reason or both?
Emotion

Sure, emotion plays a big part. The AP photo does that by itself. But the sentiment and conclusion of the caption—that gun control results in firearms controlled by the government, and that such control results in citizens helpless against abuses of power—is something I’ve never heard a reasoned argument against.

12. Describe how you think the manipulation works?
Red letters signal alarm.

Yo, egghead—I hate to disappoint you. But I’m not an artist, see? My sense of composition is pretty rudimentary. The reason is no more complicated than this: I picked red because I tried a couple other colors and thought it looked the prettiest.

The poster ignores most of the facts surrounding this particular situation—the Federal Government's need to enforce a court order to turn Elian Gonzalez (the child) over to his father after repeated attempts to negotiate the turnover were rejected by those holding the boy; the same people who had lost every legal challenge they'd filed in an effort to keep him. For example, there is no acknowledgement that the situation was resolved peacefully, and that Elian was photographed happily in his father's arms just a few hours later. Neither is there any consideration of what might have occurred had the man apparently attempting to protect Elian had a weapon. In fact, no one was injured or killed. Would that have been the case had the protector been armed? Probably not, unless he was unwilling to use his weapon; and in that case what would be the sense in having one?

No, the poster illuminates the facts: The deployment of stormtroopers against the public is the act of a tyrannical government. There was never any indication of violence on the part of the family warranting a military strike. There were many ways this could have been resolved without resorting to blitzkrieg home invasion tactics.

But the analyst’s prejudice is clear: The only safety lie in submission. Into the cattle cars, people. Resistance is futile.

13.Do you believe this item was successful propaganda?
Absolutely

14. What evidence supports your answer to the last question?
Polls showed that information like that in this poster contributed to a conviction among the members of the Cuban community in South Florida to support George W. Bush over Al Gore in the presidential election that took place a few months after the events illustrated by this image. Given the closeness of the outcome of the presidential race in Florida, this type of propaganda was clearly one of the factors that led to Mr. Bush's narrow Electoral College victory, and subsequent ascension to the presidency.

First, despite our stated intent to reach outside the choir with our posters, I doubt this saw much circulation in South Florida’s Cuban community. And I have never been silent in my criticisms of the Bush administration’s manipulation and betrayal of gun owners.

But it’s not like this “scholar” has been right in much else of his analysis.