Transterrestrial Musings

Defend Free Speech!

Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay

Site designed by

Powered by
Movable Type 4.0
Biting Commentary about Infinity, and Beyond!

« We Band Of Brothers | Main | Blood Suckers »

What Happens To The Posters After The Election?

Virginia Postrel has some thoughts:

In an interview Fairey assured Smith that his imagery "anti-propaganda propaganda" that, he suggested, is "coming from a position of moral integrity." In other words, he believes it, or at least believes it's in a good cause. The Obama posters were, of course, based on the famous propaganda image of Che Guevara. John McCain may suggest that Obama is a socialist. Fairey, a man of the left, literally paints Obama as a communist--which may involve much wishful projection as the belief in other quarters that the candidate is a secret free-trader.

Although campaign posters are surely a form of propaganda, the Obama imagery is so empty of specific exhortation that we do better to think of it as a manifestation of the candidate's glamour--a seductive illusion in which the audience sees whatever they themselves desire. Glamour is manipulative, but not coercive. It requires the audience to suspend its skepticism and the object to maintain his mystery, a tacit form of cooperation. Give the object the power to compel devotion, and glamour is suddenly neither sustainable nor necessary.

Yes, though there's actually a more accurate, more encompassing word than "socialist" or "communist" for this kind of political iconography (relating back to the thirties). It starts with an "F."


0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: What Happens To The Posters After The Election?.

TrackBack URL for this entry:


II wrote:

No worries Rand.

I plan to stick around.

Rand Simberg wrote:

I plan to stick around.

What are you talking about? What is the point of this non-sequitur?

Anonymous wrote:

II was making a pun. He posts comments, so he is a ....

II wrote:

Damn-it Rand.

Why can't we have some pun? Who knows what we might be dealing with tomorrow night.

Here's why McCain is shaky:

Mr. McCain takes an Ambien if he needs one, but in these last days there is scant sleep on the schedule. He planned to end Sunday with a three-hour flight from New Hampshire to a post-midnight rally in Miami, then rest briefly and head to the airport for an 8 a.m. departure for Tampa.

Ambien is really bad stuff - causes extreme unpredictability. Also reports of people driving asleep on Ambien.

What if McCain wins and pushes the dread button in his sleep?

Poster Puckett, where is your Michelle Obama Whitey Porn tape?

Obama is up by 7 points. Subtract 6 points for his black-face and he's still up by 1. Maybe he will win. Not a popular thought around these parts I know.

Sigivald wrote:

Well, okay, given the leader-worship factor and the religious relation to the state, I can't deny the F-word has some application.

But I think it's more of a generic Cult of Personality.

A fascist would be more militarist, more corporatist (in Mussolini's sense of the "bodies of the state", not Coroporation as business entity), and nationalist.

(Also, news flash, II - the President all by himself can't order a nuclear attack. [Well, I mean, he can TRY, but he won't be obeyed.]

The National Command Authority won't listen to any one man for starting a nuclear war, any more than any one man can launch a silo-based missile or order an attack from an SSBN, or launch a B-1 on an attack run.

Shockingly, the idea that a President or anyone else might make a bad decision for any number of reasons has already been thought of and provided for!)

Rand Simberg wrote:

A fascist would be more militarist, more corporatist (in Mussolini's sense of the "bodies of the state", not Coroporation as business entity), and nationalist.

There's nothing intrinsically nationalist about fascism, if you use the (appropriately) expanded view of the term as propounded by Jonah Goldberg (which I do). Stalin was a fascist.

memomachine wrote:


Il Obama! Il Obama! I Obama!

"A fascist would be more militarist, more corporatist (in Mussolini's sense of the "bodies of the state", not Coroporation as business entity), and nationalist."

Ummmmm. Shall I point out that Obama plans on a Civilian National Security Force that is supposedly going to provide domestic security, be as large as the US military (3.2+ million strong), be as well funded as the US military ($500+ billion/year) and be as strong as the US military (heavy artillery, tanks & aircraft carriers).

There are different styles of militarism and not all of them point outward.

Bill Maron wrote:

We've already had the "make you work" quote and the "spread the wealth" one as well. Those two statements and a willing press to drive home the message in the proper way puts us on the edge of the precipice. When Maxine nationalizes the energy industry our journey to the dark side will be complete.

Far-fetched you say? The banking industry has seen some nationalization already. Obama has talked about using CO2 as a club on the coal industry. I'm sure he has similar thoughts for the rest of it. Energy and finance. Give him a national security force and it's 1922 all over again.

Leave a comment

Note: The comment system is functional, but timing out when returning a response page. If you have submitted a comment, DON'T RESUBMIT IT IF/WHEN IT HANGS UP AND GIVES YOU A "500" PAGE. Simply click your browser "Back" button to the post page, and then refresh to see your comment.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Rand Simberg published on November 3, 2008 3:53 AM.

We Band Of Brothers was the previous entry in this blog.

Blood Suckers is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Powered by Movable Type 4.1