first let me say how much I enjoy what you're doing here! The breadth of topics that you touch on, the lightness of it but also the depth is impressive. You've inspired me to take a stab at something similar. Thank you for that.
I'm curious about your assertion concerning the link between American gun culture and propaganda from arms manufacturers. It sounds like Bernays 100 years before his time (which I was pleased to see you cite next). It sounds plausible but I'd love to hear more.
I dont expect a you're asserting crude monocausality, so how strong is the linkage in your opinion? Is it a case of the tail wagging the dog or is it more nuanced than that?
"...I’m sure you remember the Marlboro man, where does that come from? Well, that actually comes from the creation of the gun culture. In the 19th century, it was an agricultural country. Farmers had guns and chased the critters away. There was a huge gun manufacturing industry — fancy Winchester, Remington, Colt, and so on. They had a big market during the Civil War. Well, Civil War was over, the market collapsed.
There were wars going on all over Europe. They bought fancy guns from the American manufacturers. By the late 19th century, that had stopped. Europe had moved into a temporarily peaceful period. The gun manufacturers were in trouble. They didn’t have a market. Farmers didn’t want their fancy stuff. What were they going to do? What they did first was concoct a fabricated image of the Wild West — sheriffs fast on the draw and noble cowboys, all this kind of stuff.
Bottom line of this is you better get your son a Winchester rifle or he won’t be a real man. And you better get your daughter a little pink pistol or she won’t be a proper woman and so on. That was essentially the thrust of the advertising campaign. It had an enormous effect. We’re living with it right now. The whole story from the beginning is fabrication. I mean, you go back to the actual 19th century, cowboys were not the lone ranger running around to save people. It was a guy who couldn’t get a job, so maybe someone would hire him to push cows around or something like that. But we live with these stories..."
Another source I've come across is Pamela Haag's "The Gunning of America" (https://dianerehm.org/shows/2016-04-25/pamela-haag-the-gunning-of-america) where she explores the link between propoganda and gun culture. My opinion is largely informed by these two sources— it seems to have had a pretty huge influence as far as I can tell
Howdy,
first let me say how much I enjoy what you're doing here! The breadth of topics that you touch on, the lightness of it but also the depth is impressive. You've inspired me to take a stab at something similar. Thank you for that.
I'm curious about your assertion concerning the link between American gun culture and propaganda from arms manufacturers. It sounds like Bernays 100 years before his time (which I was pleased to see you cite next). It sounds plausible but I'd love to hear more.
I dont expect a you're asserting crude monocausality, so how strong is the linkage in your opinion? Is it a case of the tail wagging the dog or is it more nuanced than that?
All the best,
Sam
Thank you for your kind words.
I have only a shallow understanding of gun history in America and certainly don't feel qualified to comment in detail on this.
I started thinking about this recently because of a recent interview with Chomsky (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/23/podcasts/ezra-klein-podcast-noam-chomsky-transcript.html), where he says the following:
"...I’m sure you remember the Marlboro man, where does that come from? Well, that actually comes from the creation of the gun culture. In the 19th century, it was an agricultural country. Farmers had guns and chased the critters away. There was a huge gun manufacturing industry — fancy Winchester, Remington, Colt, and so on. They had a big market during the Civil War. Well, Civil War was over, the market collapsed.
There were wars going on all over Europe. They bought fancy guns from the American manufacturers. By the late 19th century, that had stopped. Europe had moved into a temporarily peaceful period. The gun manufacturers were in trouble. They didn’t have a market. Farmers didn’t want their fancy stuff. What were they going to do? What they did first was concoct a fabricated image of the Wild West — sheriffs fast on the draw and noble cowboys, all this kind of stuff.
Bottom line of this is you better get your son a Winchester rifle or he won’t be a real man. And you better get your daughter a little pink pistol or she won’t be a proper woman and so on. That was essentially the thrust of the advertising campaign. It had an enormous effect. We’re living with it right now. The whole story from the beginning is fabrication. I mean, you go back to the actual 19th century, cowboys were not the lone ranger running around to save people. It was a guy who couldn’t get a job, so maybe someone would hire him to push cows around or something like that. But we live with these stories..."
Another source I've come across is Pamela Haag's "The Gunning of America" (https://dianerehm.org/shows/2016-04-25/pamela-haag-the-gunning-of-america) where she explores the link between propoganda and gun culture. My opinion is largely informed by these two sources— it seems to have had a pretty huge influence as far as I can tell