For the record, I understood that your assertion about 'the bias' against the relative impact of propaganda is not the same as 'there is no propaganda'.. I concede my pointless hyperbole clouded my argument.
However, implicit in your assertion is that the effect plays a minor role, whereas I would argue it plays a compounding role. My contention is given time and a reduction in military involvement, the marketability of pro-war propaganda would naturally decrease.
However, implicit in your assertion is that the effect plays a minor role, whereas I would argue it plays a compounding role. My contention is given time and a reduction in military involvement, the marketability of pro-war propaganda would naturally decrease.