Summary of "Noam Chomsky - The youth and the mass media's false reality and history"

Noam Chomsky: Mass Media, Powerlessness, and Political Passivity

Noam Chomsky argues that auto-generated “false reality” produced by mass media helps create a widespread sense of hopelessness and powerlessness—especially among young people—leading people to accept wrongdoing and even extreme threats without acting.

Hopelessness as effective propaganda

Chomsky says many people are taught that nothing can change because “the powers are too great.” He points to public-opinion data as evidence of this mindset—for example:

Very low approval for Congress
Strong views that it should be replaced

Yet, alongside that dissatisfaction, there is still a widespread belief that “people like me can’t do anything,” which results in political passivity.

Fear without resistance

He notes that even when people fear the worst, they often don’t resist. As an example, he discusses sympathy for movements that imply the government is dangerously violent, referencing post-9/11 dynamics and related polling estimates. The argument is that people may entertain alarming possibilities while remaining inactive because they feel isolated.

Apathy vs. powerlessness

Chomsky reframes “apathy” as less a personal trait and more a learned powerlessness. However, he insists that powerlessness can change once people realize that collective action is possible.

Historical change when people stop believing they’re trapped

Chomsky contrasts earlier periods of oppression with later ones where organizing becomes thinkable:

The 1960s is presented as a turning point, where people learned to resist despite intimidation such as McCarthyism and fear caused by government investigations.
He highlights how ridicule undermined McCarthy-era fear—for instance, through activists like Abby Hoffman—arguing that repression often has a “thin” structure and can collapse when its legitimacy is challenged.

Power depends on controlling public opinion

Drawing on political theory (including a “paradox” attributed to David Hume), Chomsky argues that in every society rulers maintain power only as long as people’s attitudes and beliefs are managed. When beliefs break down, revolutions become possible.

Revolutions happen when opinion breaks through

He explains this dynamic through the English conflict between Parliament and the king—focused on whether the monarch was “above the law.” Parliament’s insistence that the king is subject to the law is described as a decisive break from religiously grounded authority, helping pave the way for constitutional governance.