Tikun magazine has an article by a couple of academics who describe the function of pro-Israeli pressure groups on American university campuses:
The tactics of the Israel Lobby plumb the depths of dishonor and indecency and include character assassination, selective misquotation, the willful distortion of the record, the fabrication of falsehoods, and an utter disregard for the truth. The aim of this Lobby is control of the policy process through the exercise of a veto over the appointment of people who dispute the wisdom of its views, the substitution of political correctness for analysis, and the exclusion of any and all options for decision by Americans and our government other than those that it favors.
We should all find alarming that what is taking place in the academy today is an extension of what takes place on Capitol Hill and in the corridors of (real) power. What is at stake is the process of representation, which shapes memory, disposition, and arguably -- in the long run at any rate -- the policy process itself. Many of the same tactics are being used in both situations; and they share the aim to monopolize legitimacy by tarnishing all criticism and questioning it as inherently illegitimate and malevolent.
The most interesting part is their description of rhetorical techniques used by these groups -- specifically, repeating unfounded accusations and insinuations, while avoiding substantive debate:
The Hasbara Handbook: Promoting Israel on Campus, which is distributed to campus activists by organizations like Stand With Us (e.g., click "Guides for Activists" on www.middle-east-info.org), explains that it is often better to score points than to engage in actual arguments, and offers an explanation for how, in its own words, "to score points whilst avoiding debate." Point-scoring, the Hasbara Handbook explains, "works because most audience members fail to analyze what they hear. Rather, they register only a key few points, and form a vague ‘impression' of whose argument was stronger." Part of the strategy is to recycle the same claims over and again, in as many settings as possible. "If people hear something often enough," the document points out, "they come to believe it."
Yes, indeed people come to believe what they hear repeatedly, without much examination. This is widely known to psychologists as the "truth effect" -- and I wrote about its application to Iran previously:
Repetition increases our familiarity with a claim. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, a feeling of greater evidence that the claim is true begins to accompany the growing familiarity. This effect of repetition is known as the "truth effect." (Max Sutherland, Advertising and the Mind of the Consumer - available on Amazon)
Comments