Benjamin Franklin: The First Diplomat & Strategic Communication
Strategic Communication gained public attention and emphasis beginning with world war I & II and has gained prominence throughout the years for military social engineers. While Strategic Communications, in regards to a historical time-line is a newly defined concept, the utilization of Strategic Communications by the United States can be traced back to US origins. Benjamin Franklin demonstrated great success in U.S. foreign policy associated with Strategic Communications in his diplomacy with France during the American war for independence. Franklin, while praised for his electricity attracting kite, was a grand spy-master and well versed in the ways of influence and persuasion. Strategic Communication aims to Inform, Influence, and persuade (Paul, 2011). Franklin was able to inform, influence and persuade the French that the United States was a legitimate governmental body and successfully gained the United States a vital ally.
It is important to note that Public diplomacy “seeks to promote the national interest and the national security of the United States through understanding, informing, and influencing foreign publics and broadening dialogue between American citizens and institutions and their counterparts abroad (Waller, 2006).” The diplomacy enacted by the founding fathers in efforts to gain French favor follow this definition precisely. Franklin was given the daunting task of obtaining a French alliance. He needed to establish credibility for the new country among the French public. The utilization of branding by Franklin gained him credibility and notoriety in the face of the French. The wealthy entrepreneur “deliberately traded his Philadelphia silk clothes for a raccoon skin hat and rustic Quaker attire, he personified the American Revolution (Waller, 2006).” The brand created by Franklin of the typical American was easily digestible to the French public and enthusiastically embraced. He was able to further gain notoriety with the aristocracy by frequenting social occasions. Franklin was able to gain credibility with the French public, thus giving his statements of American grandeur believability. “Credibility is really about believability (Paul, 2008).”
The ability of Franklin to plan ahead also contributed to his success in Strategic Communication with the French. “Franklin prepared action plans, well in advance, to implement instantly when the opportunity presented itself (Waller, 2006).” Franklin planned to capitalize on a strategic American victory over the British in order to establish bilateral cooperation between France and eventually Spain. His utilization of aligning actions and messages was pivotal in his diplomacy success. In Strategic Communications, actions speak louder than words. Franklin knew that while he may boast of the Americans military power, a military success was required to prove his claims. The surrender by General Burgoyne to American troops in October 1777 at Saratoga was the action he needed to solidify his claims (Benjamin Franklin, n.d.). “What you do matters at least as much (if not more) than what you say, especially for deployed military forces (Paul, 2011).” Franklin through his patience and ability to establish credibility with the French government led to the signing of the Franco American military alliance only two months later, thus giving the Americans the forces needed to defeat the British (Waller, 2006).
In retrospect, there are few improvements that could be made in Benjamin Franklin's Strategic Communications. Franklin was successful in achieving the five goals of Strategic Communication; “creating and maintaining credibility, promotion of shared values, promotion of American values, and improving the general image of the United States (Paul, 2011).” Franklin created credibility in the French eye by displaying an apt knowledge of French culture and by catering to their likes and dislikes. Franklin promoted shared values by playing on the French dislike of the British. Franklin's mission to France was to promote American values and to improve the image of the United States in the eyes of the French. Franklin improved the French understanding of the aspiring country and further improved the perceptions United States (Paul, 2011).
Benjamin Franklin’s immense success in Strategic Communications ultimately lead to the United States victory over the British thus gaining United States independence. Franklin, as stated by historian Leo Lemay, was the “most essential and successful American diplomat of all time (World, 2002).”
References:
"Benjamin Franklin: First American Diplomat, 1776–1785." U.S. Department of State. https://history.state.gov/milestones/17761783/bfranklin
Paul, Christopher. 2011. Strategic Communication. Westport, CT: Praeger. Kindle Edition. pp. 1168.
Waller, J. Michael. "The American Way of Propaganda: Lessons from the Founding Fathers." Public Diplomacy White Paper , 2.4nd ser., 1 (January 18, 2006): 113. http://www.iwp.edu/docLib/20060207_AmericanWayofPropaganda2.4.pdf
"World of Influence." PBS. 2002. http://www.pbs.org/benfranklin/l3_world_france.html
Image: John R. Mallernee, American Revolution Museum
The division is real, it sees like everyday I look at more and more people trying to drive a wedge between honest Americans. We need to unrig the system.
So long as ordinary citizens continue to prescribe to the false left vs right paradigm they will be the victims of divide and conquer tactics and diversion through partisan rhetoric. This will not change until you have some form of massive enlightenment on behalf of the masses which unfortunate is unlikely to ever happen. The dumbing down effect and ghetto mentality is prevalent in all facets of US consumer driven society so issues related to social, cultural, economic and political and are basically a non-issue for the unwashed.
The main problem in modern times is that the government system is so big and politically divided that you have official representatives of the federal government misrepresenting official policy internationally. For instance, an ambassador and embassy staff on site in a foreign country act and/speak in ways which are incongruent with the official policy stance in Washington. This has been leading to more and more problems internationally, and diluting American foreign policy efforts worldwide.
Policy efforts are largely driven by military doctrines hence a great portion of the US tax base, some 50% funds policies which are profitable to the very defense industries Eisenhower warned about in his 1961 farewell address to the nation. These same factors are what Mike Lofgren illustrated in his book on the Deep State and which former Prof Emertis Chalmers Johnson wrote extensively about in his trilogy starting with the classic, Blowback.
Agreed. But there are "good" military doctrines and "not good" ones (relatively speaking of course). For instance, look at that CESSPOOL known as "Cambodia" ("The Kingdom Of Wonder"). The "west" has been throwing aid at "those people", knowing FULL WELL that it was being misappropriated for decades (anyone on the ground who's not living in the "Western brainwashing fog" can see that clearly. For instance, for every run down school in that country there are 10+ $100K SUVs and about the same amount of karaoke joints (mainly to accommodate the people in the SUVs). As you said, the only LOGICAL reason why the IDIOTS in the West would continue to throw their money into the vortex would be for larger military purposes (in the case the desire to counteract the notorious ambitions on China as if the Chinese are EVER going to change -- haha!). But what I'm saying is that now that the "ex" Khmer Rouge cadre leader of the country revealed himself for what he is (overtly siding with the Chinese) the Western countries are up-in-arms about it, INCLUDING the "libtarded" U.S. Ambassador and most of the people associated with the embassy. Trust me, I know. It's like, what the hell did you expect people? This is why I am of the FIRM belief that the intelligence (mind control) operations have been the BIGGEST destructive force in BOTH the US as well as INTERNATIONALLY - and ESPECIALLY so in the "developed" world. It's a total mind-f*ck (pardon my French)... ESPECIALLY when you witness it first-hand (on the ground) but are POWERFUL to do anything about it.
Most of my current interest and readings have been on the expansion of propaganda efforts using mass media and of course, the more obscure military driven, Mind War concepts which is exactly what you are alluding too. If you get a chance, Dr. Aquino who himself was a Lt. Colonel Green Beret with extensive experience in the Phoenix Program/Vietnam and a Ph.d in political science is very much a proponent of this kind of shift in how contemporary wars are fought. He has an interesting interview on YouTube where he makes his justifications. Despite the taboo nature, he does make some seriously viable points which reiterate much of what you are saying in terms of greed, corruption and misery when opposing ideologies both economic and political are at extreme odds.