A list of examples of benevolence myth:
- Gedda (AP), September 16 2003, Message Unit 1
- Wardell (AP), May 29 2003, Message Unit 1
- Belt (LJW), April 11 2004, Message Unit 10
- Belt (LJW), April 11 2004, Message Unit 14
- Belt (LJW), April 11 2004, Message Unit 18
- Housego (AP), September 18 2004, Message Unit 1
- Gordon, Mazzetti, Shanker (NYT) August 17 2006, Message Unit 1
- Straziuzo (AP) June 23 2007, Message Unit 1
- Belt (LJW), April 11 2004, Message Unit 16
- Belt (LJW), April 11 2004, Message Unit 11
- Belt (LJW), April 11 2004, Message Unit 24
- Belt (LJW), July 12 2004, Message Unit 1
- Coleman (AP), April 9 2004, Message Unit 1
- (LJW), November 12 2004, Message Unit 4
- LJW, July 5 2005, Message Unit 1
- Housego (AP), September 18 2004, Message Unit 2
- Housego (AP), September 18 2004, Message Unit 3
- Housego (AP), September 18 2004, Message Unit 4
- Housego (AP), September 18 2004, Message Unit 6
- Housego (AP), September 18 2004, Message Unit 5
- Applebaum (Washington Post), February 13 2006, Message Unit 1
- Applebaum (Washington Post), February 13 2006, Message Unit 3
- Applebaum (Washington Post), February 13 2006, Message Unit 2
- Applebaum (Washington Post), February 13 2006, Message Unit 4
- Applebaum (Washington Post), February 13 2006, Message Unit 5
- Applebaum (Washington Post), February 13 2006, Message Unit 6
- Applebaum (Washington Post), February 13 2006, Message Unit 7
- Applebaum (Washington Post), February 13 2006, Message Unit 8
- Bearden, November 4 2005, Message Unit 5
- Bearden, November 4 2005, Message Unit 6
- Associated Press, November 8 2003, Message Unit 12
- Associated Press, November 8 2003, Message Unit 18
- MSNBC, August 19 2004, Message Unit 3
- Rothschild (LJW), August 19 2004, Message Unit 1
- Rothschild (LJW), August 19 2004, Message Unit 2
- Rothschild (LJW), August 19 2004, Message Unit 4
- Douglas and Stearns (Knight Ridder) April 6 2004, Message Unit 3
- Douglas and Stearns (Knight Ridder) April 6 2004, Message Unit 6
- Douglas and Stearns (Knight Ridder) April 6 2004, Message Unit 8
- Douglas and Stearns (Knight Ridder) April 6 2004, Message Unit 10
- Douglas and Stearns (Knight Ridder) April 6 2004, Message Unit 13
- Bearden, November 4 2005, Message Unit 1
- Bearden, November 4 2005, Message Unit 2
- Bearden, November 4 2005, Message Unit 4
- McCain, November 21 2005, Message Unit 1
- McCain, November 21 2005, Message Unit 4
- McCain, November 21 2005, Message Unit 13
- McCain, November 21 2005, Message Unit 17
- McCain, November 21 2005, Message Unit 18
- McCain, November 21 2005, Message Unit 19
- Matson, February 27 2006, Message Unit 1
- Deligne, March 20 2006 a, Message Unit 1
- Cardow, March 23 2006, Message Unit 1
- Peray, March 19 2006 a, Message Unit 1
- Peray, March 19 2006 b, Message Unit 1
- Chapatte, February 24 2006, Message Unit 1
- Deligne, March 20 2006 b, Message Unit 1
|
|
Definition of
benevolence myth
The
benevolence myth
is one of the secondary core myths, the set of five unchanging descriptions of US actions in the world. The benevolence myth deals with the interests
of the people of other countries. It says
the US helps, and does not harm, the populations of other countries.
The US never acts to take, violate or
keep what belongs to others, whether it be their property,
their rights, or their self-determination.
If it kills, injures, or imprisons the people of another country,
it only does it to help the population in general.
Scope of the benevolence myth
The benevolence myth is inviolable in patriotic messages:
the US government does not harm the populations of other countries. It does not
engage in
conquest, or acquire (or try to acquire) power over others, or their wealth, land,
resources, nor does it help its follower states to acquire
these things. It does not prevent or try to prevent the population of another
country from being free or the people of that country from
running their own lives.
Relationship of the benevolence myth to other core myths
The self-sacrifice myth, the most important of the core myths,
deals with the interests of the US government, and says
that the US government does not gain or try to gain by its actions. The implication of the
self-sacrifice myth is that if a US government action is shown, it will be shown as an action
(a) to protect America, Americans, or the people of a US ally state from some threat or violence,
or (b) to help the populations of other countries.
Thus the secondary myths, self-defense/nonaggression and humanitarianism,
between them cover all cases of US action that are shown in patriotic texts.
But what about cases of US action that are removed from history, or cases where the events
are shown but the US's role as actor is removed? If they are cases of US
actions that harm the populations of other countries, these removals are also in support
of the benevolence myth.
The benevolence myth and the changes to history
The US government's behaviors violate the benevolence myth.
To conform to the benevolence myth, the US government's acts contrary to the myth are
removed from history or converted into their opposites. Often, entire cases are
gone from the commonly portrayed history of the world; this absence is the
case for many, probably most, of the US
government's actions in the twentieth century. In
other cases, the actions are still there, but the US government's role as principal actor,
the fact that they were US actions, is removed. When neither the actions themselves
nor the US government's role as actor are
removed, the harms or costs that the population of the other country
suffered from the act are removed,
often to be replaced with gains,
so that a horrible holocaust suffered by the population at the hands of the US government
becomes a wonderful gift from the Americans
that they all enjoy. In other cases, an event (usually a violent attack
that the population opposed and desperately wanted to prevent) is
presented as if it were something that they had wanted and anticipated with great relish.
The many people whose lives were ruined by the US will barely appear on the screen,
despite the fact that their case is representative of the population,
while the tiny number whose lives were harmed by the people the US has designated as
"the bad guys" will be paraded endlessly in front of the cameras, often the same person
over and over, despite the fact that their case is unrepresentative of the population. The
story of this tiny group will then become the story of the case, and be referred to as
fact by other patriotic texts.
|
patriotized history
