Liars and other folks  

A brief skim through the comments after the columns and letters in the OC Register and the Daily Pilot suggests that everyone in Costa Mesa must be a liar. Over three-quarters of the comments reviewed during the last five days complain of lies told by the opposition or else brands the opposition liars.

“The liar's punishment is, not in the least that he is not believed, but that he cannot believe anyone else.”
― George Bernard Shaw, The Quintessence of Ibsenism

Perhaps Mr. Shaw nailed it for Costa Mesa during this election. Liars cannot believe anyone else, especially not their opponents, so they are vigorously branding and labeling and accusing others of being liars. Branding and labeling are propaganda techniques we've discussed.

What is a lie

But, what is a lie? According to Wikipedia, it means to deliver a false statement to another person which the speaking person knows is not the whole truth, intentionally.  This includes the contextual lie in which one states part of the truth out of context, knowing that without complete information, it gives a false impression.  We discussed quoting out of context in an earlier blog (2 Oct.).

Quoting out of context was illustrated with candidate John Stephens’ mailers quoting a couple of phrases from a piece in a Wall Street Journal article. The quote implied that some California cities face bankruptcy because they are Charter cities. 

Out of context lie

The article actually suggested that the cities, adopting a Charter with input from unions, accepted provisions that benefited the unions but drove them to bankruptcy. Mr. Stephens wants to write a different Charter for Costa Mesa with more input from stakeholders. (It should be noted that he is supported and endorsed by labor unions, which probably represent stakeholders in his mind.)

Others' views on lies

Religion weighs in on lying, too. The Old Testament and New Testament of the Bible both contain statements that God cannot lie and that lying is immoral. In the Qur'an those who lie destroy their souls. "For a liar who has violated the one law (of truthfulness) holds in scorn the hereafter, there is no evil that he cannot do.”

“Be bad, but at least don't be a liar, a deceiver!” 

― Leo Tolstoy, Anna Karenina

Somewhat or mostly lies

Some examples of mendaciousness in Costa Mesa’s elections don’t involve complete lies, but rather, selected truths. For example, one City Council candidate assures us she’s in favor of youth sport activities and even wore a high-school sports T-shirt to show her support. And, she assures us she’s been an avid supporter of the City for over 25 years.

What she doesn't say, is that she opposed lighting a sports field because it would bring noise to her quiet neighborhood. She suggested instead that the kids walk or ride a couple of miles (through traffic) to another, more crowded, but lighted field. Parents were outraged, but she has no children and perhaps didn't consider the dangers of traffic to youthful sports enthusiasts.

And, she made a very “cute” presentation to another city’s City Council, warning them against partnering with Costa Mesa to save expenses. She suggested that Costa Mesa couldn't be depended upon to keep its promises. (Another Quote from the Bard is suggested here: “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.”)

Are her statements lies? Probably not complete lies, at least according to the Wikipedia definition. There may be a different answer, though, from those who define mendacity from Biblical or Muslim scriptures.

Summarizing

So, we can summarize and say that liars tend to consider everyone liars, and there are many ways to sidestep the truth. And, we cannot really call someone a liar based upon a single false or misleading statement; it could be a simple error.

On the other hand, we should be particularly alert to attempts to manipulate our opinion by those who brand others liars. That is, we should suspect propaganda and investigate much more thoroughly any statements from them.

It’s election season in Costa Mesa: don’t get fooled by labels (like liar) or other attempts to manipulate your opinion by arousing emotion. That’s just propaganda. Instead, decide to support candidates and propositions based upon logic and facts.

I've decided to vote for Mensinger, Monahan, McCarthy, and to vote YES on Measure V. 

Would you trust this candidate 

with your checkbook?

Today let’s look at the ethics that constrain persuasion. We'd like to think we've evolved beyond the ethics of the Middle Ages, where knights headed east to kill those who disagreed with them about religion, and the warriors from the Middle East headed west to do likewise. Both sides killed people, burned crops, destroyed villages – all because their targets held differing beliefs. Surely we have better ethics, at least in Costa Mesa, now, right?

No more burning villages

After all, through sports, ethical training, business experience and non-profit or church work we've learned to live with those who disagree with us. Perhaps a first grader, who was miffed at not being chosen queen, would refuse to attend the chosen queen’s birthday party. She'll learn to make better ethical decisions when her lessons from kindergarten are fully absorbed, especially if she has good parental guidance.

Just as young people should learn to be very careful of their tweets and texts, they should learn that trying to destroy or damage their organization when they disagree with it can have long term effects. On them. The effects on the club or the business they attack are usually transitory.

Adults face disappointments

As an adult who wants her non-profit to expand its scope, but it doesn't,  or a manager who would rather the company invests instead of putting its money in savings, she will have to cope with disappointment. That’s something she learns how to do en route to adulthood.

There will be a few of her peers who believe that the end justifies the means. They'll set the warehouse on fire or damage the cash register if they don’t get what they want from the company. Some of them learned their ethics in illegal drug businesses, and others just found that folks would pay attention if they made a fuss.

Adults(?) in Costa Mesa

Groups that burn cosmetic warehouses come to mind, of course, but so do some behaviors closer to Costa Mesa. Remember the demonstrations around Monahan’s restaurant, trying to drive customers away because he supported enforcing immigration laws as a Council Member? Perhaps some of the demonstrators flunked kindergarten, maybe others just wanted attention.

Demonstrating opposition to something with signs and gatherings is a citizen’s right, and perhaps it’s sometimes an obligation. Trying to damage a man’s business, or to get him fired, because you oppose his views when he's acting in a civic role, is dishonest – unethical. 

We don't burn the villages of those who disagree, anymore.

The desired endpoint rarely justifies perfidy

Distributing propaganda to Costa Mesa citizens is a normal part of campaigning. Ethically the propagandist is like the demonstrator – trying to broadcast a strongly-felt message. Propaganda is a means to an end.

But sometimes an opponent chooses a “means to the end” that is petty and sneaky, unlike open propaganda. And sometimes the act they choose will do little more than annoy their opponents, and brand themselves as traitors.

For example, what would you say about telling the bank that your company is in financial trouble because you don't like the boss or his jokes?

Treachery or disloyalty or lacking integrity or . . .

Or, more to the point for this election, what do you think about the integrity and maturity of candidate Genis? Acting on her petty peeves, she testified to the Huntington Beach City Council to try to keep them from partnering with Costa Mesa to save both cities money. (There’s a more complete discussion in the 18 Oct Blog.) The link to the video of her testimony is here:  http://youtu.be/R3vkDuMNyUU

There will always be room for disagreement, but anyone who has successfully navigated kindergarten should know better than to undermine her own city out of peevishness. Peevishness, as a disgruntled citizen who seeks to damage her home City, deserves contempt. Trying to hurt Costa Mesa because she was peeved is indefensible.

Disloyalty could cost Costa Mesa lots

If she enjoyed the aura of respectability accorded a Council Member, her peevishness would warrant stark fear. What if the majority of the Council Members vote against her proposal? Her peeved testimony in Huntington Beach, as a Costa Mesa Council Member, would carry a lot more weight – and Costa Mesa could lose a lot.

A more honorable way to burn villages

A teacher once told me, “…if you belong to a group, argue about its policies, but support the group. If you cannot support the group, get out of it and attack it from outside if you want (to), but don't try to destroy it from within.” He was warning against treachery as a tactic.

Perhaps Ms. Genis would be happier if she followed his advice and moved to another city. She could testify against Costa Mesa all she wants – from somewhere else. She could launch her “burn the village” attacks from there.

Safer

And Costa Mesa would be safer.

Names, labels, accusations 

As we move toward the end of this campaign the more-subtle propaganda techniques are giving way to the blatant and accusative. Before we examine one of these, let’s get a little background.

Disloyalty

Bad faith (Latin: mala fides) is double mindedness or double heartedness in duplicity, fraud, or deception; pretending to entertain one set of feelings, and acting as if influenced by another”.  The concept is similar to perfidy, or being "without faith.”

Example

One example of bad faith would be a company representative who negotiates with union workers while having no intent of compromising. In extremis, the term refers to treason, for which, right or wrong, Benedict Arnold is the icon.

Remember that name-calling and labeling don’t have to be lies or inaccurate; they just have to substitute for facts and rational discourse to be propaganda. If they are accurate, then the names or labels are opinions, or maybe just facts.

In our own city

Now for today’s campaign example; there are posters, videos, and even phone calls circulating with the message that one of the City Council candidates is a “traitor.” This is based upon her public comments to the Huntington Beach City Council in which she strongly advised them to reject joint projects with Costa Mesa.

The HB Council wisely noted that politics in Costa Mesa was none of their business and voted to pursue joint operations with both Newport Beach and Costa Mesa to share costs and reduce expenses in partnership with the other cities.

Ms. Genis advocated against her “home” city, advising that Costa Mesa would abandon its partners and not pay its bills. Had she been taken seriously, Costa Mesa expenses could have increased, leaving less for infrastructure like road maintenance. Watch the pertinent section of the Council meeting here, about three minutes:  http://youtu.be/R3vkDuMNyUU

Labeling is similar to name calling

Labeling works much like name calling in that it can be a substitute for facts and logic. “Anti-youth” and “only cares about her house, not our kids” have been applied to the same candidate for her opposition to lights in a park that might raise the neighborhood sound level. The lights were needed for youth sports.

Ms. Genis suggested that the youth who wanted to play could go to another park that was fairly close, and even specified a route with fewer cross streets and traffic lights. The parents of kids who biked to practice weren’t happy with her suggesting more exposure to traffic.  Here’s the pertinent section of the planning meeting:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyX3LxrvMw0

Of course, the clips above are excerpts, and we have to be careful that the excerpts don’t say something different from the words in the actual context, so here’s the Council meeting in whole: http://huntingtonbeach.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=695

Adults attend HB Council Meeting

You probably noticed the decorum and civility from the floor in this meeting, and the lack of irrelevant diatribe and protest songs. Newport Beach speakers at this meeting looked like adults, regardless of whether you agree with their points or not.

So, are the  labels “traitor” and “selfish” propaganda or opinion – or something else? 

If true, what does it mean

Accurate? Well, watch the first video and think about what you do personally when you don't like what your boss, or your company, or your sports group decides to do. Do you “bad mouth” them and try to undermine their operations? If so, you'll see the terms as inaccurate and examples of propaganda. Do you resolve to try harder to convince them next time, but remain loyal? Then you might think the labels apply—as facts or at least opinions.

Labels and names, stated or not

Regardless of whether any labels and names are accurate or not, they are being used a lot in the Costa Mesa elections. Often the labels are used to “broad-brush” a candidate or to imply evil intent. We'll talk about these substitutes for facts and rational discourse in a future blog.

Sometimes the labels are not directly stated, like the pictures on a recent mailer of gangsters (or pretend gangsters) making backroom deals, although the print elsewhere on the flyer suggested sub rosa deals as a consequence of Measure V. (Note that the designers used a city that looked somewhat like Costa Mesa, and that the models were exaggerated but had unlit cigars and no ashtray. They weren't terribly concerned with accuracy, but they wanted to appear concerned for Costa Mesa as well as green and non-smoking in the pictures they chose. That is, they didn't care about truth, but they did want political correctness.)

Whether the labels are directly stated or just implied, they're just labels, and an informed or concerned citizen should look past the labels. Are the labels and names propaganda, or opinion, or a statement of fact?

Insist on facts and logic before you vote

There’s plenty of room for disagreement when the facts are reviewed concerning just about any campaign matter. But, Costa Mesa voters need to look at facts, not slogans or labels. And they should cast their vote based upon the facts and their own ethics, rather than on fear or any other induced emotion. The city needs well-informed voting this year.

Separate them and they'll behave 

The Feet to the Fire forum last night was much less disruptive than previous events. Completely unrelated, of course, were the groups of pro-Righeimer folks scattered more or less diagonally across the seating area. That prevented the anti-folks from sitting in large enough masses to feed off of each other’s excitement (or rage).

The lead picture today shows what you, too, can do in a very short time to make a something you can use to distract a speaker. This sign-maker didn’t realize that the sign couldn’t be read from the stage – not even definitively identified from the front quarter of the room.

Sarcasm is a technique too

That second sentence in this entry was deliberately designed to demonstrate sarcasm used to make a point. Early in the campaigns we saw a lot of sarcasm. It’s been largely displaced now by name calling and labeling. That’s too bad, too, because sarcasm can be fun to catch – it usually requires a moment of reflection to realize the writer is trying to manipulate your opinion without confronting you with facts or logic.

And, I saw only one attempted gesture – guy in a blue-candidate shirt leaped to his feet then made a benign gesture and sat when he noticed an old white-haired guy taking pictures. I got a blurred image, anyway.

Facts and logic

So, the crowd was reasonably well behaved as they watched Righeimer use facts and logic to demoralize and dissolve Foley. (Did I mention that Foley is a lawyer with an office in Newport Beach? Like one of our Council candidates reminds us about himself.)

Other views

Left-winger Geoff announced in his blog today that Foley looked “composted” to him and published a photo of her designed to reinforce that belief. Mostly, however, he confined his remarks to name-calling and distorting information. He didn't seem to be palpating, salivating and screaming, and I think his more timid approach was because he wasn't convinced his side was well-defended. He’s right.

Techniques to think about

Bandwagon: Propagandists use this technique to persuade the audience to follow the crowd. This device creates the impression of widespread support. That’s what the signs and disruptions and crowd cheers are designed to do, and Bandwagon is one of the first seven propaganda techniques identified, way back in the 1930’s. When confronted with Bandwagon propaganda, consider the pros and cons – and look for some facts before joining in. You could be joining a group of kooks instead of joining with the masses. I’ll rest my case without mentioning any names; the most flagrant example is well-known to Costa Mesa.

Card Stacking: A propagandist uses this technique to make the best case possible for his side and the worst for the opposing viewpoint by carefully using only those facts that support his or her side of the argument. He’ll attempt to lead the audience into accepting the facts as a conclusion. In other words, the propagandist stacks the cards against the truth. Card stacking is another primary propaganda technique, and was used by both sides during the debate.

However, the “soft” questions to Foley and the more confrontive questions to Righeimer were another use of the technique. Card stacking is the most difficult technique to detect because it does not provide all of the information necessary for the audience to make an informed decision. However, it didn't help Foley, who pretty well self-destructed, and didn’t hurt Righeimer who seems to be used to being attacked.

Register to get a better sign

The Big Labor money that’s buying TV time and sending those heavy, bright, frightening mailers to your mailbox didn't help the guy with the sign. I guess he needs to register as Anti-V in order to get better graphics. After all, with the couple hundred thousand dollars poured into the Costa Mesa election just recently, surely the labor unions could help this poor fellow get a better sign to flash at the dais.

Short flic but to the point

U-Tube presentation that’s worth a look: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=R3vkDuMNyUU

Lots of propaganda pouring through Costa Mesa for this election, due to the Big Labor interest in defeating the Charter. We’ll identify some more in another blog.