“Battleship Potemkin” by Eisenstein is in essence a Western because it uses technical tricks elaborated by D. W. Griffith to manipulate the audience.
Jean Luc Godard

If the master of Soviet propaganda Sergei Eisenstein could be told that at the end of the 20th century his disciples in the West will not be the followers of Marxism-Leninism but sellers of cinematic advertisement, he could have a stroke (from which, indeed, he died in his 50s in 1948) learning that life doesn’t correspond to ideological expectations. If Eisenstein could know that the ideological propaganda and commercial advertisement through cinema would be its glorious financial future, he could consider such ideas as a political illiteracy of petite-bourgeois thinking.

The more mass-commercial (entertaining) cinema demonstrates its manipulative essence by trying through rhetoric of exaggeration to attract/seduce the consumers to the advertised goods, the more we can discern the similarity between propagandists on the one hand and advertisers on the other.
Propaganda is the ad of ideas, while ad is propaganda of the goods. Masterful cine-propaganda or cine-ad are suggestions in a more obvious or more veiled form with which the receiver of the information must subconsciously agree with what is suggested. In other words the individual agrees to consume – to assume what is desirable and closer to his/her identity.

The masterfulness of cinema-propagandist (creator of ideas) and advertiser (creator of effects) is to make cinema audience to unconditionally agree with them without resisting the suggestions. Eisenstein’s legacy of virtuoso montage and many other operational innovations in the art of Kino-communication helps to sell the cinematic-effects to the audience.

Psychological essence of a healthy consumption is healthy appropriation, the “magic” of uniting with the appropriated object. And if consumption is psychologically built on the model eating/swallowing, propaganda and advertising – is built on the model of feeding – on the image of fauna to flora, flora for the soil and mother’s nipple for baby’s lips. Consumption as a basic interest in life is much more basic than interest in creativity, knowledge and understanding, in feeling of unity with the world in general and its mystical wholeness, in emotional and moral development or interest in different human beings and in nature as such. To make orality the central function of life is “oralization” of human experience, reduction of complicated relation to the world to a more elementary, blind and consumeristic type.

Consumers of ideology are psychologically and by sensibility the same as consumers of things and services. Only they are graspers not so much of things as appropriators of spiritual and intellectual property. Ideological consumers and consumers of goods and services both have a common – greedy posture, but the appropriated ideological “spiritual” wealth and competence provides the possessor-buyer the same sense of psychological comfort that new-owner is the new material goods.

The more people consume the more they feel that they’re, as if physically enlarging and solidifying their material territory and their new “life space”. The dynamics and versatility of consumption, possessions and ideological appropriation adds new spaces to “private kingdom” of our being. Ideological space of our beliefs and ideas, as if rooted in the very limitlessness of the world itself as the possessor’s own kingdom. In this lies the irresistibility of dogmatic religious systems and political ideologies, when people feel that they share wisdom of God and their political leaders.

Skilled professionals, like technicians and engineers feels as owners of comfort which is equivalent of ideological wealth, like Eisenstein and his Western disciples were not thinking through their art, but “know” through suggestions. Their job is not to question the world but expand what is already there, the ready-made. Their art is not philosophical, but technological. I corresponds to a hypnotical familiarity between the creator and film viewers. Eisenstein and his disciples transform the process of making and communicating images and ideas into instrument of human standardization. The “Communist society” which Eisenstein wanted to push on Soviet people and the international cine-audience is the most massive form of group property, which was offered to the ideological world market. Ideologically or economically oriented masses of people want just to live to consume, own properties, and live in their private spaces, and in their “ideological” possessions. These people are not connected with the meaning of being, they are not morally sensitive, and are not able to behave responsibly with other people.