Birth of a Cult

     Review of Death of a Nation, D’Souza Media, 2018.

Dinesh D’Souza is gradually getting better at making propaganda films—slick production values, exotic locations, decent actors, semi-famous people.  And D’Souza himself is always at the center of focus, explaining and guiding and revealing the truth that you always suspected.  But the truth, the propaganda, is just the same old attempt to discredit reason and convince us to ignore the clear evidence of our eyes and ears.

     D’Souza’s latest effort is an exposé of the secret history of liberalism, progressivism, and the Democratic Party.  (He treats these very different political theories and institutions as more or less the same thing.)  But roughly a third of the film, and maybe even a bit more, is set in Nazi Germany.  There is some documentary footage, but scenes in Nazi Germany are mostly reenactments.  (The actor who plays Hitler is actually pretty entertaining.)  Two such scenes bracket the film:  it begins in a bunker in Berlin, with the suicide of Adolph Hitler and Eva Braun; and almost at the end we witness the execution of a young woman who was part of the German resistance to the Nazis.  Between, there are wonderfully emotional scenes of warmaking and Hitlerian ranting and atrocities and such.

       The purpose of these carefully selected depictions of Nazism and Italian Fascism is clear.  Many of the attempts to smear Democrats are offered with no context whatsoever.  Roosevelt’s economic policies are labeled socialist (and hence authoritarian) with no mention of the economic disaster he was trying to rectify.  A Democratic Party platform from some election in the past is compared to the Nazi platform, with no mention of the fact that virtually all political parties, whatever their ideological stance, promise the voters peace and prosperity, and all the good things that go with them—jobs, education, medical care, whatever it is that people think they want.  But by the time the film gets to these charges, the Nazi and Fascist depictions have already provided the context—Democrats are the same as Nazis.

     Like any good propaganda piece, D’Souza’s film contains a great deal of truth.  The Democratic Party’s support for Southern (and Northern) racism well into the second half of the 20th Century certainly makes it easy for D’Souza to paint Democrats as racists.  The Party was complicit with the Klan and supported Southern racism in order to maintain electoral control.  But, again, what is not said is as important as what is.  Whatever else may be the truth about the Democratic Party, it has been since Kennedy, and it continues to be the only one of the two major parties that puts any effort at all into protecting the civil rights of people who aren’t white.  It may not be the best champion of disenfranchised groups, but neither is it their enemy.

     But wait!  The GOP is the party of Lincoln, the great leader who emancipated the slaves.  This brings us to the real point of Death of a Nation, and a most interesting point it is.  D’Souza tells us that Lincoln’s opposition to slavery was essentially rooted in economic considerations.  The problem with slavery, according to D’Souza’s Lincoln, is not that it violates important principles of equality or human dignity; rather, the moral flaw in slavery is that it allows one man to appropriate (the fruits of) another’s labor.  And thus Trump’s commitment to free market principles and opposition to socialism places him in a lineage that runs from Lincoln through Reagan to the current occupant of the White House.  (Nothing is said about the other members of this lineage.)  Unlike the Democrats, who want to socialize the economy and thereby enslave us all, Trump is the true friend of freedom and equality for all.

     Again, there is a foundation of truth here; the Democrats certainly seek a corporatist economy.  But so do the Republicans, and Trump is no exception.  Like other Republicans, he spouts the rhetoric of free markets and fiscal responsibility; but like other Republicans, he supports a regulated economy that protects the corporate sector from competition and accountability for its policies and practices.  And, like other Republicans, his spending habits are the very antithesis of fiscal responsibility.  Such has been the GOP since Reagan

     A scene by scene analysis of this film would be an interesting exercise for a course on critical thinking.  But since I’m not teaching anymore, I’m largely disinclined to do all that work.  I would encourage everyone to see this film for themselves.  Don’t hide behind the idea that you don’t want to give D’Souza your money, or that it is just too painful to watch this drivel.  If nothing else, you can learn two very important things from this film.

     First, D’Souza’s film portrays the narrative that is driving the development of the cult of personality that has grown around Trump.  D’Souza’s Trump is not just a good president.  He is larger than human, the hero who emerges in times of crisis to lead us back to the true path.  He alone can save us from the evil elites that have corrupted our country.  We all know how this nonsense ends.

     Second, the film illustrates the fundamental tension that gives good propaganda its power.  Joseph Goebbels said that if you tell a big enough lie, and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.  And modern psychology supports this.  But, as Jacques Ellul points out, the best and most effective propaganda avoids outright lies and contains much truth.  This might seem a contradiction, but it is not.  The big lie is best supported not by small lies, but by carefully selected portions of the truth.  

     This is the lesson of D’Souza’s film for people who aren’t fooled by it:  the truth can be used to deceive, and the bigger the lie, the harder it is to see.