Propaganda and the Food We Eat

Figure 1: source

The Online Etymology Dictionary has this to say about the word propaganda:

propaganda (noun): 1718, "committee of cardinals in charge of Catholic missionary work," short for Congregatio de Propaganda Fide "congregation for propagating the faith," a committee of cardinals established 1622 by Gregory XV to supervise foreign missions. The word is properly the ablative fem. gerundive of Latin propagare. Hence, "any movement to propagate some practice or ideology" (1790). Modern political sense dates from World War I, not originally pejorative. Meaning "material or information propagated to advance a cause, etc." is from 1929.

Figure 1 shows a propaganda poster created by the dairy industry to encourage consumption of milk. In primary school in the 1950's, I remember small bottles of milk being made available for free to students who would rush out of their classrooms at "little lunch" to consume one or more of the bottles. I wasn't one of them however, as I never relished to taste of milk. In the middle of the twentieth century, milk was regarded as essential for the development of healthy bones and teeth in children. The dairy lobby was very influential in those days and there was very little criticism of milk as a food source.

Figure 2: source

Notice how propaganda, as shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2 often uses rhyme as a means of reinforcing the message. However, there is a difference. The milk promotion of Figure 1 is very old-fashioned compared to the meat promotion of Figure 2. The latter uses humour and inverts the popular vegan message of "save an animal - eat a salad". To be effective, propaganda must evolve to match its audience. People nowadays are more cynical and critical than they were even fifty years ago.

Nonetheless, the purpose of propaganda is to short-circuit thinking. Slogans like "milk packs a punch with every lunch" and "Herbivores are prey, Carnivore's the way" do not encourage deeper reflection upon or investigation into the nature of the milk and meat industry. Sometimes propaganda that is intended as insulting can be used against its originators to draw attention to its silliness. For example, the use of the term soyboy. Here is a definition from dictionary.com:

What does soyboy mean? 

Associated with the alt-right, soyboy is an insult used online for men seen as effeminate liberals. It comes from the myth that consuming soy products lowers testerone levels in a man.

Figure 3: source

Justin Trudeau is perhaps the most prominent example of such an "effeminate liberal". The T-shirt shown in Figure 3 can be purchased at a site promoting veganism and so can be worn as a badge of honour. As well as rhyme, alliteration is also popular as in the phrase "soy and sodomy". There are those of course who really do see soy products as undermining and eroding masculinity. Figure 4 shows an example of this sort of "possible" propaganda. I say "possible" because I'm not sure how serious the intent is here.

Figure 4: source

 However, there's no doubt about the seriousness the Hasidic Jewish group "Gur Hasidim" shown in Figure 5:

Figure 5

I guess those who are justifiably disturbed by the inroads being made by the LGBT movement into society are looking for scapegoats and, unfortunately, soy products seem to have become an easy target. Again, like most propaganda, this linkage avoids looking at the deeper issues and reasons behind the successes of the LGBT agenda. The meat lobby will be secretly delighting in this development. It wasn't so long ago that it was responsible for the sort of propaganda shown in Figure 6:

Figure 6

It would seem that food is a real propaganda battleground and is likely to remain so in the foreseeable future. With the discovery of the importance of the human gut biome, the issue is also about what sort of food is best for maintaining a healthy gut biome? There's also the issue of foods derived from GMO's but these are issues too big to tackle here.

My general point that throughout our lives we are bombarded with propaganda regarding what we should eat, who we should fear, who we should admire, how we should vote and what we should buy. Propaganda doesn't just mean slogans on T-shirts. It can be achieved by repetition and the questioning of alternatives. For years, the influence of the meat lobby meant that mainstream media articles generally promoted the benefits of eating meat and either ignored or questioned the adequacy of alternative non-animal sources of protein. Doctors and dieticians generally supported the meat lobby. This type of propaganda is especially insidious because it is persistent and ubiquitous.

Of course the purpose of education is not to alert children to the way that propaganda shapes their attitudes and choices. It should be an integral part of their education. They should be taught to ask the simple question: cui bono (who benefits)? Who benefits from the drinking of milk and the eating of meat? This then leads to an examination of the various interest groups that promote these products and benefit from their purchase. Ideally, we would want children to make informed choices and not be swayed by simplistic slogans and slick advertising campaigns.