KILLING BY MACHINE-GUN FIRE--AND KILLING BY CIGARETTES

Professor Robert Proctor, a great and prolific author--the subject of the article below--is a long-time reader of the LSS Newsletter. He has paid special attention to my sacrificial theory of the First World War--how societies killed their own people--and wonders if there is a relationship between the death of soldiers in war and the extraordinary number of deaths caused by cigarette smoking (50 million a year?). 

Robert is the author of the monumental and definitive work on the cigarette industry, Golden Holocaust  (details and information on purchasing below).

He describes the "soft, quiet dispersed megadeath" caused by cigarettes, which can be thought of as "instruments of slow and distant violence."

He wrote to me as follows:

"I would very much like to hear how you theorize the soft, quiet, dispersed megadeath and suffering caused by cigarettes, which can be thought of as instruments of slow and distant violence.  I love your comparisons between Nazi death camps and cheerful cattle cars from the First World War, you have a kind of ethnographic optic that sees the truth under so many layers of BS—I really admire that in your work.  

"And there is a poetic quality to how you write, recognizing as you do that brevity can be the soul of wit.  Cigarette making is different of course in that death was not the goal, but rather the “unfortunate side effect” of the rapacious pursuit of profits. That’s how the industry saw it; death was a kind of inconvenient bother, a threat to business.  

"We don’t really find the higher causes and fantasies of sacrifice and duty that motivate so many other atrocities, unless perhaps it is the raw love of money, and the brute disregard for human suffering.  I’ll have to think more about this, how should we talk about death-dealing industrial apathy?  I’d really appreciate hearing your insights, however speculative!  Many thanks, Robert."

I'm just beginning to think about the questions that Robert poses. However, the following idea comes to mind: Do some people think of "money" as a "higher cause" or ideal, comparable to the way people think of nations? The desire for money is often thought of as a "realistic" pursuit; as "practical goal or tool."

However, as I often tell Mei Ha, beyond perhaps two million dollar, is the pursuit (and love) of money really "practical." Does "money" perhaps--for some people--represent a profound, higher ideal?

I don't have a quick answer to this question, but I immediately thought of a passage from Norman O. Brown's Life Against Death:

"The ambition of civilized man is revealed in the pyramid. In the pyramid reposes both the hope of immortality and the fruit of compound interest. The Iron Age, at the end of which we live, democratized the achievements of the Bronze Age (cities, metals, money, writing) and opened up the pursuit of kings (money and immortality) to the average citizen.

"But the inevitable irony redresses the balance in favor of death. Death is overcome on condition that the real actuality of life pass into these immortal and dead things; money is the man; the immortality of an estate or a corporation resides in the dead things which alone endure."

Any thoughts?

Please write to me at RAK@libraryofsocialscience.com
Richard Koenigsberg
 
THE MAN WHO STUDIES THE SPREAD OF IGNORANCE

Georgina Kenyon on Robert Proctor

Robert N. Proctor, is an American historian of science. He is a Professor of the history of science at Stanford University. In 1999 he was the first historian to testify against the tobacco industry.
Golden Holocaust: Origins of the Cigarette Catastrophe and the Case for Abolition draws on reams of formerly-secret industry documents to explore how the cigarette came to be the most widely-used drug on the planet, with six trillion sticks sold per year. He paints a harrowing picture of tobacco manufacturers conspiring to block the recognition of tobacco-cancer hazards, even as they ensnare legions of scientists and politicians in a web of denial.

To order Robert's book from Amazon click here.

In 1979, a secret memo from the tobacco industry was revealed to the public. Called the Smoking and Health Proposal, and written a decade earlier by the Brown & Williamson tobacco company, it revealed many of the tactics employed by big tobacco to counter “anti-cigarette forces”.

In one of the paper’s most revealing sections, it looks at how to market cigarettes to the mass public: “Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with the ‘body of fact’ that exists in the mind of the general public. It is also the means of establishing a controversy.”

This revelation piqued the interest of Robert Proctor, a science historian from Stanford University, who started delving into the practices of tobacco firms and how they had spread confusion about whether smoking caused cancer.

Proctor explains that ignorance can often be propagated under the guise of balanced debate. For example, the common idea that there will always be two opposing views does not always result in a rational conclusion. This was behind how tobacco firms used science to make their products look harmless, and is used today by climate change deniers to argue against the scientific evidence.

“This ‘balance routine’ has allowed the cigarette men, or climate deniers today, to claim that there are two sides to every story, that ‘experts disagree’ – creating a false picture of the truth, hence ignorance.”

We live in a world of radical ignorance – Robert Proctor

For example, says Proctor, many of the studies linking carcinogens in tobacco were conducted in mice initially, and the tobacco industry responded by saying that studies into mice did not mean that people were at risk, despite adverse health outcomes in many smokers.

A new era of ignorance

“We live in a world of radical ignorance, and the marvel is that any kind of truth cuts through the noise,” says Proctor. Even though knowledge is ‘accessible’, it does not mean it is accessed, he warns.

“Although for most things this is trivial – like, for example, the boiling point of mercury – but for bigger questions of political and philosophical import, the knowledge people have often comes from faith or tradition, or propaganda, more than anywhere else.”

Proctor found that ignorance spreads when firstly, many people do not understand a concept or fact and secondly, when special interest groups – like a commercial firm or a political group – then work hard to create confusion about an issue. In the case of ignorance about tobacco and climate change, a scientifically illiterate society will probably be more susceptible to the tactics used by those wishing to confuse and cloud the truth.

Consider climate change as an example. “The fight is not just over the existence of climate change, it’s over whether God has created the Earth for us to exploit, whether government has the right to regulate industry, whether environmentalists should be empowered, and so on. It’s not just about the facts, it’s about what is imagined to flow from and into such facts,” says Proctor.

Making up our own minds

Another academic studying ignorance is David Dunning, from Cornell University. Dunning warns that the internet is helping propagate ignorance – it is a place where everyone has a chance to be their own expert, he says, which makes them prey for powerful interests wishing to deliberately spread ignorance.

My worry is not that we are losing the ability to make up our own minds, but that it’s becoming too easy to do so – David Dunning

"While some smart people will profit from all the information now just a click away, many will be misled into a false sense of expertise. My worry is not that we are losing the ability to make up our own minds, but that it’s becoming too easy to do so. We should consult with others much more than we imagine. Other people may be imperfect as well, but often their opinions go a long way toward correcting our own imperfections, as our own imperfect expertise helps to correct their errors,” warns Dunning.

Dunning and Proctor also warn that the willful spread of ignorance is rampant throughout the US presidential primaries on both sides of the political spectrum.

“Donald Trump is the obvious current example in the US, suggesting easy solutions to followers that are either unworkable or unconstitutional,” says Dunning.

So while agnotology may have had its origins in the heyday of the tobacco industry, today the need for both a word and the study of human ignorance is as strong as ever.