Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician

Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician

22/09/2025
22/09/2025

Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician will be only too happy to abdicate in favor of his image, because the image will be much more powerful than he could ever be.

Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician will be only too happy to abdicate in favor of his image, because the image will be much more powerful than he could ever be.
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician will be only too happy to abdicate in favor of his image, because the image will be much more powerful than he could ever be.
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician will be only too happy to abdicate in favor of his image, because the image will be much more powerful than he could ever be.
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician will be only too happy to abdicate in favor of his image, because the image will be much more powerful than he could ever be.
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician will be only too happy to abdicate in favor of his image, because the image will be much more powerful than he could ever be.
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician will be only too happy to abdicate in favor of his image, because the image will be much more powerful than he could ever be.
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician will be only too happy to abdicate in favor of his image, because the image will be much more powerful than he could ever be.
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician will be only too happy to abdicate in favor of his image, because the image will be much more powerful than he could ever be.
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician will be only too happy to abdicate in favor of his image, because the image will be much more powerful than he could ever be.
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician
Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician

In the words of Marshall McLuhan, Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician will be only too happy to abdicate in favor of his image, because the image will be much more powerful than he could ever be.” we hear a prophecy spoken in the twentieth century, but written for all time. McLuhan, the sage of media, saw with piercing clarity that the age of words and arguments was fading, and a new dominion was rising—the dominion of the image. Where once the strength of a leader was judged by his deeds or the reason of his tongue, now he would be judged by the shine of the picture, the glow of the screen, the symbol that could be repeated endlessly in the minds of the people.

The origin of this quote lies in McLuhan’s lifelong meditation on media. He declared that “the medium is the message,” meaning that the form through which truth is conveyed shapes the truth itself. Thus, when politics moved from the oratory of the forum to the broadcast of television, the essence of power shifted. No longer was it the man who triumphed, but the mask he wore. McLuhan foresaw that politicians, far from resisting this transformation, would embrace it, for the image could conceal their weakness, magnify their charisma, and endure long after their words had faded.

History offers us proof of his vision. Consider the televised debate of 1960 between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon. Those who heard the debate on radio thought Nixon the victor, his arguments sharp and precise. But those who watched on television saw Kennedy—young, vibrant, confident, his image radiant—and they believed him the winner. In that moment, the balance of power shifted, not by policy, but by perception. McLuhan’s prophecy unfolded before the eyes of the world: the image spoke louder than the man himself.

Yet the ancients too had glimpses of this truth. The emperors of Rome inscribed their faces on coins, carved their likenesses into marble, and built colossal statues not merely to celebrate themselves but to create enduring images of power. The people who never heard Augustus speak or saw him with their own eyes still bowed to his likeness stamped into every transaction. The image, even then, had begun to eclipse the man. What McLuhan revealed was not entirely new, but the completion of an old pattern: that as media grew stronger, so too did the throne of imagery over reality.

The deeper meaning of McLuhan’s words is this: that in a world where symbols outweigh substance, the people risk being governed not by leaders but by illusions. The politician may abdicate responsibility for truth, content to let his carefully crafted persona reign. And the people, dazzled by the glitter of the image, may not notice until it is too late that the man behind it is frail, corrupt, or hollow. Thus, the greatest danger of the image is not its beauty, but its power to conceal.

The lesson, O listener, is urgent and enduring. Do not be deceived by the shine of appearances. Question the image you are shown—whether on screens, in speeches, or in the pages of history. Ask always: what lies beneath? What deeds match the mask? For the strength of a people depends not on the brilliance of their leaders’ portraits, but on the truth of their leaders’ actions. The ancients taught us: “By their fruits, you shall know them.” This wisdom remains, even in the age of imagery.

As for practical action, guard your own sight. When you hear a voice on the screen, search also for the record of deeds. When you see a leader exalted in the glow of media, ask what policies, what sacrifices, what truths stand behind that glow. And in your own life, do not live by image alone. Let your deeds shine brighter than your likeness, your actions stronger than your reputation. For an image may endure for a season, but only truth endures for eternity.

Thus, remember McLuhan’s prophecy: politics may bow to imagery, and the politician may surrender to his mask. But you, O seeker, need not surrender with him. Train your eyes to pierce illusion, and your heart to discern truth. For the one who sees through the image shall never be enslaved by it, but shall stand free, guided not by shadows, but by the light of reality.

Marshall McLuhan
Marshall McLuhan

Canadian - Sociologist July 21, 1911 - December 31, 1980

Tocpics Related
Notable authors
Have 4 Comment Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician

ミ★Ⓣⓗⓘeⓝᴾᴿᴼ

McLuhan’s statement raises an important point about the evolution of politics. It seems that the image has already begun to outweigh the individual in many political situations. However, could this trend be harmful in the long run? If politics becomes more about the spectacle, will we lose sight of real issues? Or could a shift towards image-based politics be a reflection of the current age, where perception sometimes holds more power than reality?

Reply.
Information sender

TTMy Hoa Truong Thi

This quote from McLuhan feels especially true in the age of constant media coverage. But is it a problem that politicians prioritize image over substance, or does it just reflect the changing nature of how we interact with politics? Is it possible to have a healthy democracy where the image is the focus, or does this risk creating a disconnect between leaders and the people they serve?

Reply.
Information sender

CTpham cat Tuong

McLuhan’s idea that politics will be replaced by imagery is fascinating. In today’s world, politicians seem to be more focused on their public persona than ever before. But does this make them more influential, or does it simply distort the truth? How do we differentiate between a politician’s image and their actual policies, and what does it mean for democracy if image becomes more important than substance?

Reply.
Information sender

NN22 - Ho Nhat Nam

Marshall McLuhan’s prediction seems eerily relevant today. With the rise of social media and the constant presence of images, it feels like politicians have become less about substance and more about their public image. But does this shift really empower the image over the politician, or does it simply mean politicians have adapted to the tools available? Can an image ever truly replace the power and responsibility of the individual leader?

Reply.
Information sender
Leave the question
Click here to rate
Information sender