In The Psychology of Crowds, Gustave Le Bon observed that one of the most distinct characteristics of modern politics is the rise of popular influence. Increasingly, international actors have become interested in more than just capturing and analysing public opinion; it is no longer an academic luxury exercised by removed professors for intellectual stimulation. Rather, public opinion has become a real catalyst for political practice and change in the world that cannot be ignored.
War is no longer limited to the battleground. Belligerents fight a different, equally critical, war: they use every means possible to influence public opinion. Hybrid war is the term that describes the emerging stratagem geared towards manipulating public opinion during wartime. Hybrid tactics go beyond brute military force, economic sanctions, or diplomatic sway; they shape, direct, and influence the public perception of war. The question is, then, why and how international actors attempt to control public opinion?
Public Support
The field of economics has been dominated by the ‘rational choice’ paradigm, which maintains that individuals make well-informed, self-interested decisions. In this view, people seek to maximise utility and minimise risk, making their behaviour easily predictable. Yet ability to predict human behaviour remains deeply complex with high margin of error. Later economic theories emerged to address the limitations of classical economics. One school in particular, namely behavioural economics, fundamentally challenged the dominant rationalist school. It maintains that human behaviour is indeed irrational, influenced by a host of emotional and environmental biases that shape individual decision-making.
Years ago, Le Bon asserted that crowds override individuality. A person’s individual convictions, beliefs, and perceptions dissolve in a crowd, thus forming different psychological entities. Crowds therefore are not the sum of their individual parts; rather, they form a collective consciousness that dominates individual rationality. As Le Bon puts it, crowd psychology is driven by impulsiveness, incapacity to reason, and absence of judgement.
Consequently, shaping and influencing public opinion is a craft that is far from coincidence. Techniques and tools are often used by specialists in the field to achieve desired outcomes. Manufacturing consent is one such tool. Mass opinion surrounding a specific subject may be influenced through intensive media coverage and appeal to emotions rather than facts. By employing a shock element such as human right abuse, extreme poverty, or catastrophes, emotions are stirred, and facts become secondary. Lines between truth and imagination, aggressor and aggressed, become blurred. Those who control the means control the narrative.
Means of Control
Public opinion is not limited to moral judgments. It is reflected in the conscious and unconscious use of language, in exaggerating achievements or undermining losses. Public opinion reflects indirect methods that are employed to achieve desired goals. These tools include:
1. Popular economic sanctions:
Unlike sanctions carried by powerful states or instigated by the UN Security Council, different sorts of sanctions have been taking form in recent years: crowd sanctions. They are similar to crowd funding, which has become an instrumental tool in providing support to grassroots initiatives or even large corporations wanting to promote social initiatives. Crowd sanctions happen in the form of individuals boycotting products, which in themselves become an opportunity to market products for benefiting other parties.
People in of the Middle East launched many such campaigns. Israel has been the subject of extensive, ongoing popular boycott campaign lead by civil groups in the region and beyond. France, too, especially following the Prophet cartoons row and the outcry over the remarks made by French President Emmanuel Macron defending the cartoons under the token of free speech. In the context of the Russo-Ukrainian war, campaigns to boycott Russian products have intensified in recent months, though similar campaigns were launched much earlier. In 2013, Ukrainians launched ‘do not buy Russian goods!’ to boycott Russian commerce. Americans identifying with the campaign boycotted Russian brands of Vodka and other alcoholic drinks. Such campaigns can cause economic damage to target countries. This way, influencing crowds has become a strategic tool in wars to damage opponents– not just for greater good or revealing truth.
Likewise, states with blemished public image become less attractive to tourists, suffering serious economic consequences as a result.
2. Armed volunteering:
A notable development in the Russo-Ukrainian war is the influx of volunteers from Europe to fight for Ukraine. President Zelensky of Ukraine called upon Europeans to join his troops in fighting Russia and issued a decree allowing foreign volunteers to enter the country visa free.
Social media has played an integral role in shaping popular opinion. Images of European volunteers leaving their homes for Ukraine were used to encourage others to follow suit. The implication is sobering: civilians were influenced to carry arms and fight a war that might cost them their own lives– though other reasons cannot be ignored. Many right-wing zealots, thrill seekers, and individuals carrying personal grudge against Russia found in the Ukrainian war the opportunity to fight, motivated by their own personal narrative.
3. Biased humanitarian aid:
The war in Ukraine spawned world-wide support. In Europe, neighbouring countries opened their borders to Ukrainians fleeing the war, offering shelter and protection. Yet bias in dealing with refugees surfaced as Western media coverage of the war intensified. Many non-Ukrainians faced discrimination, even inhumane treatment. In many instances, priority was given to white Ukrainians. Other refugees of darker complexion or foreign residents who had been living in Ukraine and had to flee the war, were neglected and their safe passage out of the country severely impeded. Hundreds of foreign refugees were trapped at Ukrainian boarders, when European politicians were campaigning to replace Afghans in refugee camps with Ukrainians. But many Ukrainians faced prejudice, too. Those of Russian ethnic background are blamed for the war. The war in Ukraine has revealed forces at play to control the narrative and influence public opinion. It has revealed a double standard in shaping the European public opinion in relation to issues of immigration. Western and Eastern immigrants are not equally welcomed. Years of campaigning against Syrian and African immigrants have produced unwelcoming policies. Whereas Ukrainians–who fit the European standards–were warmly received with arms wide open. Continent wide humanitarian campaigns have been launched urging Europeans to host Ukrainian refugees in their own homes and to donate to Ukrainian families and children. European schools welcomed Ukrainian children with standing ovations. Moving imagery, indeed, but one cannot help but question discrepancies in dealing with common human plight.
4. Pressuring governments:
Western governments bank on public opinion as a means for international pressure and influence. Even before the Ukrainian war, the West have sought to influence the Russian public opinion to instigate political and even regime change. Shaping public opinion can be such a powerful tool to achieve political gains and pressure governments to concede.
Risky Game
Influencing public opinion may seem simple, but it is not. Shaping public opinion is a highly complex goal that is fraught with risks and failure. Wagering on public opinion does not always yield the desired results. Two key reasons, which are:
1. The public is fickle:
While it may be possible to push the public opinion in one direction it may well be possible to drive it in the opposite direction. Today the tools of communications and influence have become accessible and highly complex. State-controlled media (such as Russia Today in the case of Russia) has been around for long, but social media as well has become the avenue for state propaganda. Tik Tok is a case in point. The video-sharing platform is considered a Chinese tool to break US’ monopoly on social media and push counter-Western narrative that suite China’s global agenda. Despite the sanctity of free speech in the West, European officials have moved to ban Russian media outlets to prevent the influencing of European public opinion.
2. Short-term cycles:
Public opinion changes rather quickly. Individuals tend to adopt views for short periods of time until they take into consideration other factors that may influence their positions. Self-interest plays a key role in how strong individuals sticks to their views. And as the Russo-Ukrainian war prolongs, the chances are European public opinion would shift, especially as commodity and energy prices spike, and labour costs increase due to lack of cheaper workforce that traditionally come from easter Europe, driving cost of living to unprecedented highs. And while states may continue to develop advanced techniques to manipulate public perceptions, mistaken the man who thinks he has control over the game of public opinion– for the crowds are unpredictable and illusive.
