How Did Nietzsche Use Propaganda To Characterize Hitler

Hitler, however, whether through misinterpretation or deliberate manipulation, used the words "blond beast" to illustrate his ideal of the blond-haired, blue-eyed Nordic human. Though wholly incorrect, it is very easy to see how the Nazis were able to use Nietzsche's words to validate their ideas. The discussion of the "nobleness" of the "blond beast" could be twisted by any halfwit and made into racist ideology, even though Nietzsche had not the slightest penchant for such ideals. The second great influence of Nietzsche on Hitler was the idea of the superman. Nietzsche believed that certain people of the noble morality could rise above the pettiness of existence and live as a race of supermen. This idea of the superman fed Hitler's idea of
the master race, and the influence is clearly visible in Hitler's writings. The supermen, Nietzsche said, would live above the rest of the ignoble populace, and fulfill the "birthright" of their master moralities. Hitler, while believing Nietzsche's idea of the superiority of some races, warped the idea into the "proven" superiority of the German race. During those war years, the "superman" began to be associated with the German nation; and militarism and imperialism were read into Nietzsche's conception of power, although nothing could have been further from his mind. (Payne) Therefore Nietzsche did not legitimately give Hitler a testimonial, and the Nazis neither are superior nor were they not plain folk.
Another type of propaganda is when politicians endeavor to introduce themselves as ordinary citizens, otherwise known as plain folk. While examining the beginning of a political speech, the politician acknowledges the company of dignitaries, and then says my fellow citizens. The politician, leaders of labor unions, and professional societies need the public to believe they are one of us. This helps the speaker to connect to the audience; with a connection the audience is likely to believe their propaganda (Standler). The plain-folks appeal is at work when candidates go around shaking hands with factory workers, kissing babies in supermarkets, and sampling pasta with Italians, fried chicken with Southerners, bagels and blintzes with Jews. “Now I’m a businessman like yourselves” is a plain-folks appeal, as is, “I’ve been a farm boy all my life.” Politicians try the plain-folks appeal when they say, “I’m just a small-town boy like you fine people.” The use of such expressions once prompted Lyndon Johnson to quip, “Whenever I hear someone say, ‘I’m just an old country lawyer,’ the first thing I reach for is my wallet to make sure it’s still there.” The irrelevancy of the plain-folks appeal is obvious: even if the man is “one of us” (which may not be true at all), that doesn’t mean that his ideas and programs are sound or even that he honestly has our best interests at heart. Although propagandists wouldn’t use it unless it had been proven to work. You can protect yourself by asking, “Aside from his ‘nice guy next door’ image, what does this man stand for? Are his ideas and his past record really supportive of my best interests (Cross)? Instead of pretending to be plain folk, card stacking is propaganda that selects only the facts that support the propagandist’s point of view, and ignores all the others.
An additional type of propaganda is card stacker, which introduces the particular narration of facts that are positive to reach the desired conclusion.
This is accomplished by the intentional exclusion of facts that are objectionable to the desired conclusion (Standler). Some questions are so multifaceted and complex that no one can understand them without considering a wide variety of evidence. One collection of facts could make us feel one way and another collection could make us feel just the opposite. For example, a candidate could appear like a legislative achiever if you say, “Representative Smith introduced more new bills than any other member of the Congress,” and neglect to mention that most of them were preposterous. Senator Smith engages in card stacking when he talks about creating jobs without mentioning the cost to the taxpayers. He says he wants to help his countrymen keep their jobs, but doesn’t mention that the corporations are overseas. This device of propaganda is not untrue, but then again it is not the whole truth. There are three propagandist methods used to influence thinking: appealing to our emotions, distracting our attention, and misleading logic that appears to be reasonable and encourages the people to get onto the bandwagon
(Cross).
Moreover, the bandwagon is another form of propaganda; the theme of the bandwagon is for everyone is buying the product you should too. A good number of people prefer to be in the majority, because most people prefer to be a winner. Many people like to be conformist, rather than principled or be criticized for being different. An example of the bandwagon is the 2016 presidential election that encouraged the public to “Join us and help us march to victory and win.” “Everyone else is doing it.” With parades, rallies and marching bands that create support, all the while Trump says, “If I’m elected, everybody will have a job, I guarantee it (Nelson).” In addition to an effort to tap into America's insatiable appetite for Pokémon, Hillary Clinton held a campaign event at Pokémon gym and PokéStop in Ohio. The event promises attendees to “get free Pokémon and battle each other while you register voters and learn more about Sec. Hillary Clinton (Nelson).” Another bandwagon people are influenced by is an advertisement. The advertisement will advocate for a product to motivate the consumer to try that product, and be like other people. A variation to the bandwagon propaganda is to proclaim the product to be the up-and-coming rage, proclaiming the consumer needs to be ahead of the crowd. The consumer is invited to be the minority ahead of the majority (Delwiche).
Insisting on a binary choice is another propaganda technique. The speaker or writer insists that the people reach one of two options, ally with us, or become the enemy. Propaganda statements used to make their point are, “are you part of the solution or part of the problem, ” “are you with us or against us,” “you either oppose terrorism or you support terrorism.” Insisting on a binary choice demands creates propagation by segregating everyone. Religious zealots and political extremists use similar demands, but recognizing this propaganda technique, the reader will be able to distinguish what is propaganda in speeches (Delwiche). In 2016, we had a binary choice between Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. One or the other will be our next president. Whether you are a Republican or a conservative and you don't vote for Trump, you are helping Hillary Clinton become the next president, whether you vote for her or not. If you are a democrat or Liberal if you do not vote Hillary, Trump will be the next president. The options are position between two extremes or black-and-white, with no shades of gray. What disputes between the “educated” in our society demonstrate is that on both sides, the perception of truth remains mainly defined by opposites: something is either true or it is false. We feel contented with this, because it enables us to label and organize everything around us in logical, black-and-white terms giving us a measure of control. (Nathan) Insisting on a binary choice is another propaganda technique. The speaker or writer insists that the people reach one of two options, ally with us, or become the enemy. When the speaker gives the audience a Binary choice, you are with us or against us, he may also use Pejorative labels to get his point across.
Pejorative labels refer to words and phrases that injure, offend, or belittle someone or something, known as a derogatory term or a term of abuse. A clever propaganda assault is effective by attaching one or more pejorative label a person. Such labels can be administered to block the enemy from us and put the enemy on the defensive. American Politics has a specific Pejorative labels of insults based on party membership. For instance, a Democrat ridiculing a Republican might use the term wing nut coupling the notion of right-wing extremism. The Pejorative labels Republican would use to insult Democrats would be moon bat, suggesting ideology-crazed partisans howling at the moon. Another common slur is libitard, from the words liberal and –tard in retard, an insulting term for a person with intellectual disabilities. Thus, libitard means liberal who is retarded, this label is an extreme form of insult by extremist (Nordquest).
Lastly, another propaganda method is when the speaker or writer labels the enemy as an extremist. Proclaiming that they are moderate and in the majority. On the other hand, the enemy is an extremist, who is beyond the borders of acceptable conduct. Not to justify extremism, the so-called extremists sometimes advocate for change to confront others viewpoint. Associating an extremist label on a person and encourages the audience or reader to accordingly disregard our rebukes the extremists. The supposed extremist potentially may have information worth considering, mainly when the extremist label is only propaganda. In the region of politics or religion coherent reasons are hard to find, which makes it problematic to change political or religious belief. An example of a person being labeled extremist is Dr. Jack Kevorkian, a retired physician in Michigan. Dr Kevorkian denounced mainstream society about the unsympathetic laws prohibiting assisted suicides. Dr. Kevorkian candidly defied both the law and medical ethics, daring prosecutors to convict him. He attempted to direct awareness to the public. Regrettably, after a string of early achievements for Kevorkian, he was convicted, and vanished from public awareness. Perhaps the destiny for most sincere extremists is to disappear as a martyr to their cause (Standler).
Persuasive information is greatly increased through propaganda. It influences many people such as readers, writers, and listeners. To achieve Propagandistic goals they use seven misleading forms of propaganda. The first propaganda technique is name-calling. This technique is used to degrade rivals bye referring to their opponent as uncontrollable or unintelligent. The second form of propaganda is Glittering generalities, which is the opposite of name-calling, and used to produce an emotional effect to invoke an emotional response. A third type of propaganda is plain folk, used to make the listener believe the speaker has a common connection to the listener. The fourth type of propaganda is card stacker, which is accomplished by the intentional exclusion of facts that are objectionable to the desired conclusion. The fifth propaganda technique is the bandwagon; everyone is buying a product so you should too, because people prefer to be a winner. The sixth propaganda technique is when the speaker or writer insists that the people become an ally or enemy. The seventh and final propaganda techniques are pejorative labels, which is an effective assault by labeling another person. All propaganda techniques are disparaging and innately disruptive because it influence many people and prevents people from resolving issues.