Honor by association leverages the reverence or admiration society holds for certain symbols, institutions, or values, allowing the speaker to gain credibility and moral authority by aligning themselves with these revered entities. By positioning themselves as protectors or advocates of these "sacred cows," the speaker appropriates the associated honor and prestige, bolstering their own image while deflecting criticism.
Honor by association is a specific application of cognitive association, or "transfer," a classical propaganda technique. Transfer works by asserting the positive or negative qualities of one entity onto another, leaving a lasting impression that persists even if the association is irrelevant.
This technique also capitalizes on the halo effect
- the cognitive bias that occurs when the perception of a single positive characteristic of a person extends to broader judgments about them, their ideas, or their abilities.
, a cognitive bias where positive impressions of one attribute extend to unrelated aspects of an individual or entity. By tethering themselves or their policies to sacred cows—symbols or ideals that evoke near-universal respect—speakers can leverage this bias to elevate their own credibility and moral standing.
Sacred cows in the United States often include God, Christianity, the military, veterans, the police, the American flag, the national anthem, free-market capitalism, and the American dream. These symbols resonate deeply because they reflect foundational aspects of American identity, such as patriotism, faith, and individual liberty. By tapping into these emotional connections, speakers make criticism of themselves seem not only misplaced but even unpatriotic or immoral.
While honor by association elevates a speaker’s credibility, it can also shield them from criticism by intertwining their identity with untouchable ideals. The mere act of publicly defending a cultural sacred cow can create a dynamic where any critic of the defender—no matter the nature of their criticism—risks being perceived as attacking the sacred cow itself.
For example, if a politician vehemently defends the displaying of Christmas decorations in public spaces, by criticizing the politician, the critic risks being perceived as being hostile to Christianity or against all religion. Similarly, if a politician portrays themselves as a staunch supporter of the military, any criticism of them can be interpreted as being unpatriotic or even unAmerican. Likewise, a politician who passionately defends law enforcement can make critics of them appear hostile not only to the police but to the rule of law itself.
This halo influence shifts attention away from the speaker’s actions or policies and toward the critic’s perceived opposition to the sacred cow, creating a powerful disincentive for scrutinizing the speaker.
Exposing this technique is particularly challenging because those employing it can always demand the benefit of the doubt regarding their true intentions. And while it is impossible to know someone’s motives when championing or defending a sacred cow, the likelihood of propagandistic intent increases when the speaker’s authenticity can be called into question.
Authenticity, in this context, refers to whether the speaker’s support for the sacred cow aligns with their past behavior, consistent values, or tangible actions. For example, a politician championing the active military or veterans who has no history of military service—or even a history of avoiding it—raises questions of authenticity. Similarly, a politician championing religion who has no history of attending religious services or expressing religious beliefs before entering politics invites skepticism about the sincerity of their rhetoric.
Even when the speaker’s motives are called into question, audiences often struggle to separate the speaker from the ideals they defend. Emotional connections to revered symbols can overshadow concerns about authenticity, making this technique one of the most difficult to expose and disarm.
Recognizing honor by association requires attention to authenticity and context. When a politician’s rhetoric conflicts with their history or values, it is essential to ask whether their defense of a sacred cow is sincere or purely performative. Pay close attention to whether their actions consistently reflect the ideals they claim to uphold, or if their rhetoric is merely opportunistic.
By critically evaluating the alignment between a speaker’s words and actions, audiences can better distinguish genuine advocacy from manipulative rhetoric designed to exploit sacred cows for personal gain.
