The term propaganda is often liberally applied to the current context and stage of political/geopolitical development of the Western world (the Global North). At times, the focus of the operationalisation of propaganda in the management of perception and consensus focuses on how it is done and who does it. This work intends to answer these central questions and concerns, but will also address the question, why it is done? The object of study is the President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, the propaganda created around her, and the cognitive contradictions that it creates.
Propaganda has a long history of operationalisation in modern society as a means of regulating and engineering the management of the perception and reputation of key political figures. It is part of the intention to manufacture a desired reputation and brand of a certain key political figure as a means of attempting to justify and legitimise their rule. A key point here is that it is the ability of propaganda to cultivate a desired image among a specific audience and to convince them of its sincerity and truthfulness even if it is neither sincere or truthful: the primary concern is whether the audience believes it to be true or not. One of the historical means of propaganda to mass publics as a means of justifying and legitimising a ruler was the bust of that ruler on coins so that the public knew and associated their financial fortunes with a particular king or emperor, a practice that is still use today by contemporary rulers.
In the present-day context of Western Liberal Democracies, propaganda is still playing a highly important and prominent role in attempting to preserve a political system in deep crisis. Although this tends to be attempted through the invocation of politically and socially virtuous sets of ‘universal’ values and norms, intended to justify and legitimise the current set of the establishment mainstream political ‘leaders.’ Although the focus of this work is on von der Leyen, it is necessary to analyse her words and deeds within the context of the dominant political institutions in Europe, which is the European Union and how it seeks to represent its reputation and mission.
In George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984, the oppressive and repressive political institution of the Ministry of Truth propagated three slogans on its wall as a means of virtue signalling to society what was expected in terms of adherence to ‘correct’ thoughts. The European Union (EU) also adheres to and signals its own virtuous slogans that refer to the role of democracy, the rule of law, and the respect for human rights. In a rather cult-like messianic and zealous tone, the EU attempts to repeat the message by “speaking with one voice” as an independent conditional force for good in the world.
This is the political-institutional and ideological context from which the 13th President of the European Commission (EC), Ursula von der Leyen, came to prominence in 2019 and was confirmed for a second term in 2024. According to the website of the President of the European Commission, there are a number of strategic priorities established for the EU from 2019/2024:
- a European Green Deal;
- a Europe fit for the digital age
- an economy that works for people;
- a stronger Europe in the world;
- promoting our European way of life;
- a new push for European democracy.
On the surface, these would seem to be worthy and positive goals to pursue. But upon closer examination, they carry a propagandistic approach to the problem of trying to appeal to a mass audience, which is why they are all somewhat vague in their definition and articulation as well as being open to simultaneous multiple interpretations. Large audiences are less likely to be persuaded and influenced by very exact definitions and ideas as there will be disagreements emerging regarding the finer details regarding the implementation of strategic priorities. However, if the definitions and ideas are vaguely articulated, it creates the situation where individuals of the mass audience can interpret the information in a manner that resonates with them as an individual, whilst the mass audience assumes they are in consensus even though there is a lack of conformity in the operationalisation and result of the vision. At best, these strategic goals can be seen and understood through the light of populist mass communication.
In July 2024, von der Leyen had her term as EC President renewed a second time (2024-2029). It is interesting concerning the propaganda and the framing used to try to justify and legitimise this political act. To try and fit with the propaganda frames and slogans of the EU concerning democracy, there was an attempt by the establishment mainstream liberal media to frame this selection by the establishment political elite as an “election”, therefore presenting the façade of an open and democratic endorsement of her as the best candidate by the people. The ever reliable fourth branch of government the BBC was one of many that chose to use this frame. This was in spite of the fact that even the EC chose to refer to the process as a selection by establishment politics and not a democratic election, although still keeping the key word elect in the announcement. During the period of the re-selection, the gushing and servile tone of some establishment liberal media was at work and earned their derogatory nickname of ‘presstitutes’.
There were arguments made for her re-selection, including by von der Leyen, who made an emotional ‘anti-extremist’ diatribe in the European Parliament that called for a strict speak and act with one voice policy, together with demonisation of those that dared diverge from this policy. Politico went overboard as any pretence of fourth estate was rapidly abandoned as it mulled whether the MEPs would “crown Queen Ursula again” in a in a deeply servile act of deference. After ‘Queen Ursula’ was recrowned, Politico asked: “can Ursula von der Leyen save Europe?” So not only was von der Leyen royalty, she was a saint and saviour of Europe and the 450 million citizens of the EU as well! This narrative was amplified by other media reports on von der Leyen being the best and most able form of defence against various malign official foreign enemies such as China, Russia and Donald Trump.
Arguments were also made as to why von der Leyen did not warrant or deserve a second term. One of the glaring reasons is the litany of failures that have marked her political career, including before her current position. She has been in positions of power at a time of the mass migration crisis, handling of the COVID-19 vaccine contract, the Ukraine crisis, the de-industrialisation of Europe, and the Gaza crisis. A key observation is that these crises are invariably someone else’s fault, often an ‘official’ US enemy state as China or Russia. Examining her public positions on social media such as X regarding key crisis events faced by Europe and the wider world, there is no independent EU position as all of its strategic decisions align with the public positions and national interests of the United States. Although her re-selection was a classic Papal Election, it did not go without criticism or resistance, such as the harsh rebuke by the Polish MEP that called for von der Leyen to be jailed. She has also been accused of double standards and hypocrisy on human rights, where the records of some countries are criticised whilst others are ignored for geopolitical expediency. For example, some EU staff have openly criticised her stance on Gaza and unconditional support for Israel.
To sum up, the attempts to engineer a positive reputation and image for von der Leyen are mired in a series of dilemmas and contradictions. She is not a skilled public speaker, especially when challenged, which leaves her true nature exposed. During the disastrous reign of ‘Queen’ Ursula she has overseen the wholesale undermining and violation the EU’s Orwellian slogans. That is obvious given the massive disparity between word of the ‘sacred’ norms and values and the action of compromising and sacrificing them. The system is in a massive relative decline and is locked in a state of emotional desperation. It is seeking an unrealistic avenue to rescue itself through textual justification and an accumulation of legitimacy via an all pervasive campaign of mass propaganda.
The propaganda of the narrative does not support the reality of the results of the undermining of political pluralism and democracy, the destruction of peace, the devastation of the standards of living for Europeans, the utter disregard and lack of respect for human rights and dignity in Europe and beyond, and the slave mentality towards US strategic objectives and interests.
(Featured Image: “Prime Minister Sanna Marin and President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen meeting in Helsinki 3.2.2022” by FinnishGovernment is licensed under CC BY 2.0.)
