Jieyi Li1,*
1, Taiyuan University of Technology, 030002, China.
Abstract
Objective: This research discusses Cold War posters from 1945 to 1991 as instruments of ideological formation. It compares the two rival blocks’ visual languages as they vied to influence political awareness and public memory.
Methods: The present project employs comparative historical analysis methodology with systematic visual interpretation methods. Propaganda artifacts from the Soviet Union, China, Eastern Europe, the United States, and Western Europe are examined through an interdisciplinary framework that combines critical ideology theory, visual rhetoric theory, cultural memory theory, and cross-cultural communications. The methodological framework employs iconographic, iconological, and semiotic analytical methods.
Findings: Socialist realist aesthetics like collective heroism, hierarchical composition, and warm colors were employed in Eastern bloc propaganda, whereas consumerist imagery with individual freedom through horizontal democratic composition and cool colors formed the foundation of Western propaganda. Both systems engaged in so-called “semiotic warfare,” in which the same visual signs were used to convey effectively diametrically opposed meanings. The research delineates three phases of evolution: aggressive binary storytelling (1945-1962), subtle détente messaging (1963-1979), and asymmetrical terminal approaches (1980-1991). Non-governmental movements also produced alternative visual public spheres that challenged bipolar models.
Originality: The paper deconstructs the interdependent triad of technology, aesthetics, and politics within Cold War visual culture, illustrating how propaganda posters developed from straightforward political communication to devices for the production of ideological subjects. The historical analysis offers valuable context for making sense of contemporary digital propaganda techniques and visual manipulation strategies in environments characterized by post-truth dynamics.
Keywords: Cold War, Political Posters, Ideology, Visual Language, Comparative History
1.1 Research Context and Questions
The Cold War period (1945-1991) was a unique global conflict on the ideological level, which was not just marked by military confrontations but also manifested itself in extremely developed visual rhetoric and cultural artifacts with deep effects on world relations and public awareness throughout its duration [1]. In our contemporary era, contemporary theorists recognize visual propaganda as a core component of alleged “soft warfare.” For this purpose, rival superpowers made use of visually-based media aimed at communicating and articulating their individual stances through carefully planned campaigns that were extremely well incorporated into the day-to-day activities of the societies all over the world. Its strategic utilization before the television age as a very effective method of mass message transmission drew upon its peculiar strengths such as immediate visual effect, ease of reproducibility, and emotional appeal, to influence public opinion in a manner in which the traditional diplomatic channels were not capable [2].
One of the most significant fields of study on this phenomenon in the past is that of salient issues surrounding the advent of rival paradigms of ideological representation in poster art between the Western and Eastern blocs. The blocs created visual regimes that did not just represent but actually constructed political identity according to their respective geopolitical agendas [3]. Competing aesthetic sensibilities founded upon opposing political philosophies—that is, socialist realism and capitalist consumerism, and collective heroism and individual freedom—perceive considerable structural inclinations toward how each of these competing philosophies established its core values, thus legitimizing certain worldviews while habitually excluding other perceptions [4]. The long-term influence of such visual strategies on civic consciousness and collective memory-making reaches outside of the historical appeal of these phenomena, as their ongoing relevance to the scholarly examination of prevailing trends in political rhetoric is highlighted by contemporary scholarly inquiry, in addition to the long-term visual legacies that inform contemporary geopolitics [5].
1.2 Literature Review
The historiography of Cold War studies has undergone a paradigmatic shift since the 1990s, moving away from traditional diplomatic and military accounts toward more complex cultural and transnational approaches highlighting the ideological dimensions and visual representations of the conflict [6, 7]. This turn is reflective of a key methodological innovation in the historiographical scholarship of the Cold War, namely the proposition that Cold War struggles were articulated through elaborate networks of cultural production, mass media dissemination, and aesthetic practice that transcended conventional state-to-state relations. Recent research has focused more and more on the visual aspects of Cold War cultural conflict, analyzing how propaganda posters were essential sites of ideological battle and meaning-making in different international contexts. The development of the so-called “new Cold War history” has included previously marginal voices from the Global South, Eastern Europe, and non-state actors into the narrative. This inclusion shows how visual propaganda operated differently in different cultural contexts while having some general characteristics, i.e., its reliance on emotive images and symbolic systems [8]. This change in historiographic practice has accompanied a new wave of interest in the materiality of propaganda objects in the archive, as techniques in digital humanities provide unparalleled access to visual collections that describe the complex relation between state power, artistic innovation, and popular reception in the Cold War era [9].
Theoretical frameworks of political propaganda have progressed significantly more than the conventional models, yet the foundational texts are still essential in order to understand how visual media build and disseminate ideological narratives throughout mass culture [10]. Althusser’s (1971) theoretico-system of ideological-state-apparatuses proves to be particularly helpful for an examination of the functional operation of propaganda posters as material practices that interpellate individuals into specific subject-positions in ideology through aesthetic pleasure and affective alignment, rather than through overt coercion [11]. Recent scholarship has expanded on these theories by looking at how digital developments shift the ways that propaganda is conducted while still aligning with the visual rhetoric of the Cold War era [12]. Researchers in a study of propaganda and visual culture have observed sophisticated feedback loops between state-sponsored visualizations and the creation of popular culture, demonstrating that propaganda is made successful not merely through top-down communication but also through active interpretation, recontextualization, and resistance on the part of various audience groups[13].
The use of semiotic and visual culture analysis methodologies in the examination of Cold War propaganda has yielded ever more nuanced understandings of how political ideologies are coded into aesthetic representations [14]. Current academic work illustrates how propaganda posters functioned as elaborate semiotic systems, bringing together linguistic, iconographic, and chromatic signs to generate meanings beyond their apparent political content. This tendency has led scholars to refer to them as “visual ideologies” that were effective at normalizing worldviews through aesthetic means [15]. The interdisciplinary realm of visual studies has provided methodological strategies enabling an exploration of the functioning of Cold War propaganda posters as historical artifacts, aesthetic entities, and tools of subject constitution. The approach identifies the limitations of methodologies that treat visual propaganda as a simple reflection of pre-existing political stances. Recent scholarship places greater accent on transnational circulation and transmission of visual symbols across ideological divides, revealing the degree to which propaganda images operated in multifaceted processes of cultural translation, appropriation, and subversion that ultimately destabilize simplistic East-West binaries. The incorporation of digital approaches in visual culture research has facilitated the ease with which researchers can identify patterns within large collections of propaganda images. This leads them to uncover previously unrecognized relationships between design tactics and political efficacy while remaining attentive to the important particularity of individual images and their context of production and reception [16, 17].
This study uses an integrated theoretical approach that synthesizes critical theory of ideology, visual rhetoric theory, cultural memory theory, and cross-cultural communication theory methodologies to analyze the complicated processes through which Cold War propaganda posters became sites for constructing and contesting ideological positions within various political systems. Critical ideology theory provides central analytical terms for studying the processes of visual propaganda, not only as overt political rhetoric but as complex systems of meaning-making that legitimate some viewpoints and exclude or devalue others. It is made possible by what has now been referred to as “visual ideologies,” which link artistic value and political commitment. Further, visual rhetoric theory deepens these understandings by extending the analysis of persuasive strategies in poster design to show how elements of composition, color choices, and symbolic systems operate as argumentative tools that create certain dynamics between the audience and political authority [18, 19].
Cultural memory theory illuminates how propaganda posters participated in broader processes of collective remembrance and forgetting, functioning as material archives that shaped public understanding of historical events while simultaneously constructing frameworks for interpreting contemporary political realities [20]. Cross-cultural communication theory proves particularly valuable for analyzing the transnational circulation and reception of propaganda imagery, demonstrating how visual messages undergo complex processes of translation, appropriation, and resistance as they move across cultural boundaries, with recent scholarship emphasizing the role of cultural psychology in shaping differential interpretations of identical visual materials [21-23]. The integration of these theoretical perspectives enables a multidimensional analysis that captures both the systematic nature of ideological production and the contingent, culturally specific processes through which propaganda meanings were negotiated and contested by diverse audiences [24].
Figure 1. Integrated Theoretical Framework for Cold War Propaganda Poster Analysis
The figure presents a conceptual model showing the interconnections between four theoretical approaches (Critical Theory of Ideology, Visual Rhetoric, Cultural Memory Theory, and Cross-cultural Communication Theory) and their convergence on Cold War propaganda posters as the central analytical object. Each theoretical domain contributes specific analytical dimensions to the comprehensive examination of ideological construction, visual persuasion, and cultural reception processes.
1.4 Research Significance and Innovation
This work covers an important lacuna in the Cold War culture’s historiographical analysis by systematically examining the visual elements of the clash of ideologies through the lenses of propaganda posters, an area not much studied by researchers but of critical importance in shaping public opinion during this pivotal moment in history. Exhaustive analysis of the use of propaganda by the two blocs through the lens of visual culture deepens the understanding of the Cold War’s workings beyond the traditional diplomacy and military stories, at the same time unearthing the complex ways by which competing superpowers wielded visual methods to frame political identities and mobilize popular backing through a range of cultural outlets.
The methodological richness of applying comparative historical analysis in the analysis of visual propaganda artifacts brings fresh structures of political communication that rise above ideological boundaries. This adds substantial strength to the formulation of theory in both historical studies and communication studies, at the same time highlighting the merit of interdisciplinary approaches to explaining complex cultural realities. In addition, such historical analysis supplies critical insights on the nature of contemporary visual politics concerning cyber-propaganda and algorithmic manipulation. Aesthetic and psychological approaches documented in the Cold War-era poster campaigns have lasting impacts on contemporary political persuasion operations, thus rendering the current work especially relevant to explaining the ability of visual media to intensify ideological discourse throughout temporal contexts and within contemporary realities.
This research acknowledges the methodological limitations of dealing with digitally mediated material of doubtful provenance; however, it shows that propaganda photographs, which have attained wide digital circulation, are an important element of cultural memory that is worth exploring. This is especially relevant since their continued reproduction and transformation reveal active processes of ideological meaning-making that go beyond their original historical context.
2. Research Methods
2.1 Research Design and Methodology
This research utilizes a methodological approach that synthesizes a range of approaches, bringing together comparative historical analysis with systematic visual interpretation methodologies to examine Cold War propaganda posters in diverse political systems and cultural contexts. Comparative historical methodology is used as the main analytical lens, where propaganda artifacts from both the Eastern and Western blocs are evaluated simultaneously both across geographical borders and temporally across the Cold War years. This method allows for a more adequate understanding of the development of visual strategies with regard to changing geopolitics while accounting for the particular point in history that shapes both the production and reception of propaganda. As illustrated in Table 1, the visual analysis framework has three linked interpretative levels, ranging from describing visual elements to cultural contextualization, and finally, to ideological decoding. Each level of interpretation provides singular analytical insights that, when combined, give a complete understanding of propaganda posters as complex systems of political communication.
Table 1. Integrated Visual Analysis Framework for Cold War Propaganda Posters
| Analytical Level | Primary Focus | Key Components | Methodological Questions |
| Iconographic Analysis | Visual Elements & Motifs | Color schemes and palettes Human figures and poses Objects and symbols Spatial composition Typography and text placement | What visual elements are present? How are figures positioned? What objects appear repeatedly? • Which colors dominate? |
| Iconological Analysis | Cultural Meanings & Context | Historical references Cultural symbolism Artistic traditions Social conventions Political iconography | What cultural meanings do symbols carry? How do images relate to historical events? What artistic traditions are invoked? Which cultural values are emphasized? |
| Semiotic Analysis | Ideological Messages & Codes | Signifier-signified relationships Mythological structures Binary oppositions Connotative meanings • Intertextual references | How do signs construct meaning? What ideological messages are encoded? Which binary oppositions structure the imagery? How do images interpellate viewers? |
| Comparative Synthesis | Cross-Cultural Patterns | Convergent strategies Divergent approaches Cultural adaptations Transnational circulation Reception variations | What patterns emerge across blocs? How do strategies differ? Which elements transcend boundaries? How are images transformed in circulation? |
The methodological synthesis outlined in Table 1 enables rigorous examination of propaganda materials through multiple analytical lenses while maintaining systematic comparability across diverse cultural and political contexts, thereby revealing both universal mechanisms of visual persuasion and culturally specific strategies of ideological construction.
2.2 Data Sources and Sample Selection
This research project uses a digital humanities approach, taking advantage of freely accessible online image repositories and digital collections to compare propaganda posters from the Cold War period. It is important to note that contemporary scholarship is increasingly reliant on digitized materials, which enable comparative research across geographical and institutional contexts, while necessarily raising key issues of verification and provenance of such materials. The systematic sampling technique involves several criteria aimed at a representative coverage of propaganda items across different temporal, geographical, thematic, and distributional axes, with the time range covering the whole Cold War period from 1945 to 1991, thus including the development of visual approaches over different stages of ideological rivalry.
The sample selection focuses on American and Soviet sources as main priorities, supplemented with major collections of China and other Eastern and Western European nations. This method also allows for systematic comparative analysis of varied political structures and cultural narratives. Thematic categorization is defined by four general categories of propaganda: political mobilization, war recruitment, social construction, and cultural education. Second, the criteria for selection highlight posters that were widely circulated and made a long-lasting impact on culture, and thus attained wide popular visibility and a lasting place in collective memory through their continued relevance in scholarly works and internet archives.
2.3 Case Selection and Analysis Procedures
The research method of this study relies on the visual examination of iconic propaganda posters previously recognized through extensive research of digital archives and online databases. The criteria for choice are unique examples that have been given considerable attention in scholarly writings and popular accounts, with the assurance that the visual materials to be examined are the ones that had a lasting impact on Cold War visual culture. Yet, there are a number of cases where the precise origin or distribution records are uncertain.
The final interpretive stage involves analysis of selected works in various theoretical frameworks. Each poster is interpreted alongside pertinent historical documents, official reports, and cultural artifacts that illuminate the contexts in which they were produced and consumed. This detailed examination guarantees meticulous study of the collection, while simultaneously providing deep insight into outstanding examples of the prevailing trends in ideological construction and visual manipulation techniques employed throughout the Cold War.
2.4 Reliability and Validity
The research maintains methodological integrity via the use of triangulation methods, which confirm findings derived from a variety of archival materials, contemporary sources, and secondary texts to ensure interpretative truth. At the same time, it acknowledges that visual analysis naturally involves subjective components that require systematic verification procedures. Scholarly evaluation procedures include senior academics with a background in Cold War history, visual culture studies, and design history, who carefully review both analytical procedures and interpretative findings. Outcomes provide noteworthy insight that reinforces the scholarly authenticity of the research and offers remedies against possible misinterpretation resulting from disciplinary agendas or methodological limitations. Reflexive approaches acknowledge that researchers’ cultural backgrounds, theoretical perspectives, and temporal positions inevitably influence their interpretative work. This acknowledgment emphasizes the necessity of explicit documentation of analytical decisions and conscious attempts to view propaganda texts through various cultural eyes, as opposed to the universal application of standardized interpretative models. Not only does this strategy maintain the integrity of cross-cultural research, but it also acknowledges that absolute objectivity is an unreachable goal for humanistic research that deals with ideologically invested material.
Use of digitally available photographs as surrogates for original archival sources requires a heightened awareness of the mediated nature of these visual records. One must recognize that concerns of digital reproduction, dubious provenance, and potential manipulation during dissemination affect the integrity of interpretation. At the same time, the wide distribution and recognition of these photographs establish their cultural significance in public memory beyond their original archival contexts.
3. Visual Ideological Construction in Eastern Bloc
3.1 Soviet Union: Visual Hegemony of Socialist Realism
The Stalin Soviet Union regime’s (1945-1953) visual propaganda machinery evolved into a complex system of ideological construction, employing the tropes of socialist realism to render political power in a visual mythology. This system developed the standard templates that would soon direct the entire Eastern Bloc propaganda machinery during the course of the Cold War. One of the most compelling examples of this process is observed in the visual rhetoric of ubiquitously disseminated propagandistic posters such as “Great Stalin – Banner of Friendship Among Peoples” (Figure 2). The cult of personality here assumes its shape through deeply rooted iconographic conventions; Stalin is represented as a father figure with benevolent qualities, surrounded by delegations of individuals symbolizing various Soviet nationalities. They are depicted in bright, shining colors that convey a sense of unity and prosperity under his leadership. The visual rhetoric during the period, as evident in posters featuring Stalin voting “For the People’s Happiness” (Figure 3) and in military propaganda featuring soldiers (Figure 4), employed precise methods of idealization. The leader’s representation was created without shadows or imperfections, his figure overshadowed the compositions with a hierarchical scale, and his image was invariably associated with imagery of abundance, technological advancement, and collective celebration. This created a visual universe in which political authority was inextricably tied to the very fabric of natural law.
| Figure 2. Soviet propaganda poster “Great Stalin – Banner of Friendship Among Peoples,” ca. 1950. | Figure 3. Soviet propaganda poster showing Stalin voting “For the People’s Happiness,” ca. 1950. | Figure 4. Soviet military propaganda poster depicting Stalin with soldiers, ca. 1945-1950. |
Note: Original archival source could not be verified. Image in public domain.
The post-Stalin period witnessed significant recalibrations in visual propaganda strategies, with Khrushchev’s “thaw” (1953-1964) introducing new iconographic possibilities that reflected broader political transformations while maintaining fundamental socialist realist principles, particularly through the celebration of technological achievements that could project Soviet superiority without invoking Stalin’s discredited Figure. The space race provided ideal subject matter for this transition, as demonstrated in posters celebrating Yuri Gagarin’s historic flight on April 12, 1961 (Figures 5), where the cosmonaut emerged as the embodiment of the New Soviet Man—young, dynamic, and future-oriented—whose peasant origins and scientific achievement perfectly synthesized socialist values with technological modernity. This period’s visual language, exemplified in posters depicting Soviet satellites and space exploration (Figure 6), shifted from personality worship to collective achievement, emphasizing the Soviet system’s capacity to conquer nature and space through scientific socialism, while maintaining the optimistic color palettes and heroic compositional strategies inherited from the Stalinist era but redirected toward depersonalized symbols of progress.
| Figure 5. Soviet space propaganda poster featuring Yuri Gagarin, April 12, 1961. | Figure 6. Soviet space technology educational poster “Soviet Artificial Earth Satellites,” ca. 1957-1964. |
Note: Original archival source could not be verified. Image in public domain.
During the Brezhnev era (1964-1982), visual propaganda entered a phase of conservative stagnation characterized by bureaucratic aesthetics that privileged stability over innovation, producing increasingly formulaic imagery that reflected the regime’s defensive posture and diminishing revolutionary momentum, as evidenced in official parade photography and institutional celebrations (Figure 7). The period’s propaganda maintained earlier visual conventions but with diminished dynamism, recycling established symbols—the hammer and sickle, red banners, collective labor scenes—without the utopian fervor that had characterized earlier decades, while cautiously incorporating themes of international peace and cooperation (Figure 8) that reflected détente policies. Anti-religious campaigns continued through this period with posters contrasting athletic vitality with religious obscurantism (Figures 9-11), yet even these critical works displayed a routinized aesthetic that suggested ideological exhaustion rather than revolutionary transformation, revealing how visual propaganda systems, once instruments of radical social engineering, had ossified into defensive mechanisms for maintaining an increasingly brittle status quo.
| Figure 7. Soviet military parade with “Glory to the CPSU” banner, ca. 1970s. | Figure 8. Soviet international peace propaganda poster, ca. 1970s. | ||
| Figure 9. Soviet anti-religious propaganda poster contrasting sports and religion, ca. 1970s. | Figure 10. Soviet propaganda poster depicting woman reaching for the stars, ca. 1960s. | Figure 11. Soviet anti-religious propaganda magazine cover “The Atheist at the Machine,” ca. 1920s-1930s. | |
Note: Original archival source could not be verified. Image in public domain.
3.2 China: Revolutionary Romanticism in Local Practice
China’s revolutionary romanticism manifested through distinct phases of visual adaptation that transformed Soviet socialist realist aesthetics into uniquely Chinese propaganda systems, creating what scholars identify as a hybrid visual language that served both international communist solidarity and nationalist cultural assertion [25].. During the initial period of socialist construction (1949-1957), Chinese propaganda posters demonstrated systematic transplantation of Soviet iconographic conventions while incorporating indigenous artistic traditions through the New Year Picture movement, as exemplified in Figure 12-13, which display the characteristic fusion of traditional folk art motifs with revolutionary content depicting land reform struggles and collective agricultural celebration. The Sino-Soviet friendship theme dominated this era’s visual production, evident in posters showing Stalin and Mao together (Figure 14) and collaborative industrial development imagery (Figure 15), though these representations increasingly incorporated Chinese aesthetic elements such as traditional color palettes and compositional principles derived from guohua painting traditions [26].
| Figure12. “Return to the County with New Records” land reform poster, ca. 1950. | Figure 14. Sino-Soviet friendship poster depicting Stalin and Mao with doves of peace, ca. 1950. |
| Figure 13. “Returning with Awards” New Year picture, 1964. | Figure 15. Soviet-Chinese industrial cooperation poster, ca. 1953. |
Note: Original archival source could not be verified. Image in public domain.
The radical intensification of visual propaganda during the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution periods (1958-1976) generated what contemporary scholars characterize as an “aesthetic extremism” that reached its apotheosis in the hong guang liang (red, bright, shining) principle, eliminating all visual ambiguity in favor of absolute ideological clarity. The iconic “Chairman Mao Goes to Anyuan” (Figure 16, shown both as stamp and painting reproductions), created through collective design processes in 1968 and reproduced over 900 million times, exemplifies this period’s fusion of revolutionary romanticism with historical revisionism, depicting Mao as a quasi-divine figure whose every visual element—from windblown hair suggesting revolutionary dynamism to the upward gaze indicating visionary leadership—carried precise symbolic meaning while simultaneously erasing Liu Shaoqi’s actual historical role[27]. Model opera Figurery proliferated during this period, as shown in Figures 17-18, establishing standardized visual vocabularies for revolutionary heroism that emphasized hypermasculinized bodies, dramatic gestures, and the complete subordination of individual identity to collective revolutionary purpose[28].
| Figure 16. “Chairman Mao Goes to Anyuan” oil painting by Liu Chunhua, 1968. | Figure 17. “Red Detachment of Women” model opera poster, ca. 1970s. | Figure 18. “White-Haired Girl” model opera poster, ca. 1970s. |
Note: Original archival source could not be verified. Image in public domain.
The reform era’s visual relaxation (1978-1991) witnessed significant aesthetic transformations as propaganda posters shifted from revolutionary mobilization toward modernization narratives, incorporating technological imagery and relatively naturalistic human representations that departed from Cultural Revolution extremism while maintaining fundamental socialist iconographic structures. Posters from this period, exemplified in Figures 19-22, demonstrate “pragmatic romanticism,” featuring computer technology, space exploration, and educational themes that reimagined socialist progress through scientific rather than purely political frameworks, though still employing characteristic bright colors and optimistic compositional strategies inherited from earlier periods. As shown in Table 2, these visual transformations reflected broader ideological shifts while maintaining continuities in fundamental propaganda objectives and distribution mechanisms.
| Figure 19. “Pursue New Knowledge, Dare to Create” modernization poster, ca. 1980s. | Figure 20. “Love Science, Study Science, Use Science” educational poster, ca. 1980s. | Figure 21. “March Toward the Four Modernizations” poster, ca. 1980s. | Figure 22. “Unite as One, Strive Forward” poster, ca. 1980s. |
Note: Original archival source could not be verified. Image in public domain.
Table 2. Evolution of Visual Characteristics in Chinese Propaganda Posters (1949-1991)
| Period | Dominant Color Schemes | Human Figure Representation | Primary Themes | Artistic Influences | Production Methods |
| Socialist Construction (1949-1957) | Multicolored palette with red accents; earth tones for agricultural scenes | Realistic proportions; happy peasants and workers; Sino-Soviet friendship imagery | Land reform, agricultural abundance, industrial development, international solidarity | Soviet socialist realism merged with traditional New Year picture styles | Woodblock prints, lithography, limited color printing |
| Great Leap Forward to Cultural Revolution (1958-1976) | “Hong guang liang” aesthetic – dominated by bright reds, yellows; elimination of shadows | Hyperidealized bodies; standardized facial features; heroic poses; gender neutrality | Class struggle, Mao worship, revolutionary operas, militant themes | Revolutionary romanticism; complete rejection of traditional aesthetics | Mass mechanical reproduction, simplified printing for maximum distribution |
| Early Reform Era (1978-1991) | Softer color palettes; return of blues and greens; technological imagery | More naturalistic proportions; diverse occupations shown; individual features returning | Four Modernizations, science and technology, education, international opening | Hybrid of socialist realism with emerging commercial design influences | Improved printing technology allowing photographic elements and gradients |
3.3 Eastern Europe: Visual Tension Between Compliance and Resistance
The Eastern European visual propaganda environment of the Cold War was a contradictory duality where state-imposed socialist realism existed alongside deeply ingrained cultural traditions. The result of this engagement was personalized aesthetic solutions that enabled political compliance through multivalent visual metaphors and oblique modes of subversion. Comparative analysis of communist media shows the same imaginative elements in a five-country visual propaganda campaign with the same methodologies being adopted in every country; though there were common approaches, yet each country employed distinctive ways which converted ideological restrictions into creative opportunities through what modern scholars explain as “productive ambiguity” to allow multiple interpretative dimensions to coexist in individual images. The development of these visual languages in Poland, East Germany, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia illustrates how artists utilized the instability of visual meaning inherent in images to make propaganda that addressed not just official demands but also conveyed subversive messages to audiences educated to decode hidden meanings. This resulted in the phenomenon of “aesopian aesthetics,” a hallmark of the Eastern Bloc’s visual culture.
Polish poster design has become an outstanding example of such double awareness on a worldwide scale, which is largely owed to the extensive Warsaw Academy support, which encouraged artistic freedom despite the restrictive nature of propaganda. This support allowed for the detachment of artworks from their initial contexts, and as a result, affected graphic design tendencies worldwide. The poster for “Apocalypse Now” (Figure 23) represents the introduction of Western filmic themes into surrealist visual poetry, with strange facial distortions and vibrant coloration reconceptualizing Hollywood war films as expansive metaphors of violence. This is an example of Polish artists employing “translational resistance” to recast international cultural objects in the mold of indigenous artistic paradigms. The phenomenon carried over into the realm of cinema posters, encompassing theatrical productions, political campaigns, and cultural events. Artists created increasingly complex metaphorical vocabularies that functioned through visual puns, morphological transformations, and symbolic inversions, which censors either did not catch or deliberately chose to overlook. This process is explored by recent researchers as indicative of the complicated interaction between propaganda and popular sentiment that captivated the attention of commentators throughout the entire Cold War era.
| Figure 23. Polish film poster for “Apocalypse Now” by Waldemar Świerzy, 1979. | Figure 24. East German propaganda poster “Wir Sind 900 Millionen”, ca. 1970s. | Figure 25. Surrealist architectural landscape poster from Hungary, ca. 1970s. |
East German propaganda posters constituted a uniquely recognizable negotiation between compliance and resistance that combined Bauhaus-derived modernist traditions with Soviet-enforced socialist realism to produce what scholars define as “bureaucratic aesthetics” that ironically enabled veiled articulations of dissent through technical control and formal innovation. A good illustration of this strategy is the “Wir Sind 900 Millionen” (We Are 900 Million) poster (Figure 24), which shows agricultural equipment traveling through socialist nations’ flags-adorned golden fields. Here, productivist imagery is mixed with geometric precision, a type of “aesthetic double-speak” where modernist formal vocabularies convey implicit criticisms of ideological orthodoxy. The superpowers simplified the complexities of political reality during the Cold War into a bipolar model; East German designers, however, evolved ever more subtle visual strategies that exploited the gap between official discourse and its visual representation. This was most readily apparent in cultural posters, where abstract experimentation achieved levels that would have been unthinkable in explicitly political contexts, thus generating what current research describes as “zones of ambiguity” within totalitarian visual regimes.
Table 3. Comparative Analysis of Eastern European Propaganda Strategies (1945-1989)
| Aspect | Poland | East Germany | Hungary | Czechoslovakia |
| Dominant Aesthetic | Painterly expressionism, surrealist imagery, metaphorical complexity | Bauhaus-influenced precision, photomontage, technical modernism | Post-1956: “Goulash Communism” hybrid aesthetics | Pre-1968: Experimental modernism; Post-1968: Subdued symbolism |
| Resistance Strategies | Visual metaphor, multi-layered symbolism, “aesopian” coding | Formal experimentation within bureaucratic constraints | Conceptual art practices, mail art networks | Folk motif appropriation, historical allegory |
| Key Visual Motifs | Fragmented bodies, circus imagery, theatrical masks, metamorphosis | Industrial machinery, architectural monumentality, geometric abstraction | Impossible spaces, doubled identities, visual paradoxes | Natural imagery, traditional patterns, coded historical references |
| State Control | Selective enforcement, “blind eye” approach to ambiguity | Strict ideological monitoring with technical exceptions | “3Ts” policy: promote, tolerate, ban | Pre-1968: relative freedom; Post-1968: intensive surveillance |
| International Impact | Global influence on poster design; museum collections worldwide | Limited circulation; regional influence primarily | Underground recognition through samizdat networks | Pre-invasion: festival awards; post-1968: cultural isolation |
The Hungarian approach to propaganda design following the 1956 uprising developed “negotiated autonomy,” wherein artists created parallel visual languages for official and unofficial contexts that occasionally intersected in unexpected ways, as demonstrated in conceptual works that appropriated state imagery for subversive purposes. The sophisticated deployment of visual paradoxes, exemplified in works featuring impossible architectural spaces and trompe-l’oeil effects (Figure 25), functioned as metaphors for the psychological dislocations of living under surveillance states while maintaining plausible deniability regarding their political content. The lasting impact of these diverse Eastern European approaches to visual propaganda continues to resonate in contemporary design practices, demonstrating how constraints paradoxically generated innovations that enriched global visual culture while preserving local identities under authoritarian pressure.
4. Visual Ideological Construction in Western Bloc
4.1 United States: Dual Variations of Freedom and Fear
The selected images effectively illustrate the evolution of American Cold War propaganda strategies across different presidential eras, demonstrating how visual rhetoric adapted to shifting geopolitical contexts while maintaining core themes of freedom versus fear. The use of propaganda began almost with the Cold War itself, with animated features like Make Mine Freedom (1948) extolling the advantages and freedoms available to those who live in a capitalist society, establishing patterns that would persist throughout the conflict but manifest through increasingly sophisticated visual languages that integrated commercial aesthetics with political messaging. The transformation from explicit government-produced propaganda to more subtle integration of ideological content within popular culture represents what contemporary scholars characterize as the “domestication” of Cold War anxieties through consumer imagery.
| Figure 26. “I Want You for U.S. Army” recruitment poster by James Montgomery Flagg, 1917 | Figure 27. “Avenge Pearl Harbor” propaganda poster, ca. 1942. | Figure 28. “Better Dead Than Red” anti-communist poster, ca. 1950s. | Figure 29. “The American Dream” satirical digital artwork, contemporary. |
Figure 26’s iconic Uncle Sam recruitment poster, though originating in World War I, became recontextualized during the Cold War as a symbol of patriotic duty against communist threats, while Figure 27’s sexualized “Avenge Pearl Harbor” poster demonstrates the gendered dimensions of American propaganda that conflated military service with masculine protection of feminized national values. Figure 28’s “Better Dead Than Red” slogan epitomizes the binary thinking that characterized American anti-communist rhetoric, employing stark visual contrasts and militaristic Figurery to reinforce the existential nature of ideological conflict, while Figure 29’s satirical appropriation of 1950s suburban Imagery reveals how elements of Cold War propaganda can be found scattered throughout radio series, dramas and sit-coms made in America during the 1950s, many of which celebrated the distinct advantages of living in a prosperous, capitalist nation. Contemporary analysis reveals how these visual strategies operated through what scholars identify as “affective mobilization” that channeled anxieties about nuclear war and communist infiltration into consumer behaviors and lifestyle choices, creating “the militarization of everyday life” wherein domestic spaces became frontlines in ideological warfare.
Table 4. Evolution of American Cold War Visual Propaganda Strategies (1945-1989)
| Period | Dominant Visual Themes | Key Propaganda Techniques | Distribution Channels | Effectiveness Indicators |
| Truman-Eisenhower (1945-1961) | Nuclear anxiety, suburban prosperity, binary morality | Fear appeals, lifestyle contrast, gendered imagery | Government posters, civil defense films, commercial advertising | High public compliance with civil defense drills; consumer spending increases |
| Kennedy-Johnson (1961-1969) | Space race triumph, modernization, youth activism | Aspirational messaging, technological superiority, cultural diplomacy | Television broadcasts, USIA exhibitions, popular music | Mixed reception; credibility gap emerges with Vietnam |
| Nixon-Reagan (1969-1989) | Détente ambiguity, renewed militarism, morning optimism | Nostalgic appeals, enemy demonization, patriotic revival | Presidential speeches, Hollywood films, MTV aesthetics | Restored confidence metrics; successful reframing of conflict |
The enduring legacy of American visual propaganda during the Cold War era continues to influence contemporary political rhetoric. Current scholarly studies demonstrate that today’s digital propaganda tactics frequently recycle and modify those used during the Cold War, leveraging social media platforms and algorithmic dissemination systems.
4.2 Western Europe: Diversified Anti-Communist Expression
The visual images of Western European anti-communism in the Cold War were extremely diverse from the strategies in US propaganda, depicting subtle cultural negotiation that occurred between transatlantic unity and native intellectual traditions resisting unidimensional ideological dichotomies. Beginning in the mid-1950s, several prominent intellectuals proclaimed a mounting anxiety in Paris, Bonn, and most other capitals throughout Europe about the deleterious Americanisation looming over the continent’s sovereignty, cultural identity, and social hierarchy. This phenomenon has been described by contemporary academics as a “third way” visual culture, which both counteracts Soviet totalitarianism and American consumer capitalism with characteristic European visual strategies. The chosen images attain this multi-faceted positioning via literary appropriations, minimalist design discourses, and imagery reflective of a torn nation that eschewed the strident visual rhetoric prevalent in superpower propaganda without surrendering the refined anti-totalitarian narrative.
| Figure 30. “Animal Farm” by George Orwell, book cover illustration by Ralph Steadman, contemporary edition. | Figure 31. “1984” by George Orwell, minimalist cover design featuring surveillance eye, contemporary edition. | Figure 32. “RightClick” digital artwork depicting Berlin Wall at Brandenburg Gate, contemporary. | Figure 33. “Le Poing de Non Retour” (The Point of No Return), French protest poster, May 1968. |
Note: While these contemporary adaptations postdate the Cold War period, they demonstrate the enduring influence of Cold War visual strategies and their continued relevance in contemporary political discourse.
British propaganda exemplified this nuanced approach through transforming Orwell’s literary dystopias into visual metaphors that operated through intellectual sophistication rather than emotional manipulation, as demonstrated in contemporary adaptations of Animal Farm (Figure 30) that employ modernist illustration techniques to convey anti-totalitarian themes without resorting to crude caricature. The iconic 1984 book cover design (Figure 31) represents what western media outlets, such as voice America, BBC, and Vatican Radio, sought a different approach…maintaining political loyalty to their nation states, there governmental brief was to project the positive aspects of their nations through minimalist aesthetics that trusted audiences to decode complex political meanings. French visual culture during this period embodied particular tensions between anti-communist sentiment and revolutionary traditions, as exemplified in the May 1968 poster “Le Poing de Non Retour” (The Point of No Return) (Figure 32), which appropriated revolutionary iconography—the raised fist—to express resistance against both capitalist exploitation and Soviet-style authoritarianism, demonstrating the “radical third way” that defined French intellectual opposition during the Cold War. West German visual culture operated within the unique constraints of national division, producing propaganda “defensive modernism,” wherein economic prosperity became the primary vehicle for ideological expression, while Berlin Wall imagery (Figure 33) functioned as both literal documentation and metaphorical representation of Europe’s Cold War divisions, creating what scholars term “proximity propaganda” that derived power from immediate geographical and emotional adjacency to communist regimes.
4.3 Non-Governmental Forces: Visual Innovation of Alternative Voices
The emergence of non-governmental movements during the Cold War represented a fundamental challenge to bipolar ideological frameworks, creating what contemporary scholars characterize as “alternative visual publics” that transcended state-sponsored propaganda systems through grassroots aesthetic innovation and transnational solidarity networks [31]. Aldermaston marches continued into the late 1960s, when tens of thousands of people participated in the four-day marches, establishing the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament’s iconic peace symbol as a globally recognized visual language that operated independently of both Eastern and Western propaganda apparatuses. The convergence of peace, environmental, and student movements during the late 1960s generated unprecedented visual innovation that McGarry identify as protest aesthetics that are “performative and communicative, constituting a movement through the performance of politics”, wherein traditional hierarchies of artistic production dissolved in favor of immediate, participatory, and democratic forms of visual communication that challenged both capitalist commodification and socialist state control [32]. As Barkela et al. argue in their study of artistic activism, such protest aesthetics create “disruptive communication” that enables movements to “express dissent” through visual forms that transcend traditional political boundaries[33].
In 1968, a single-colour print depicting an officer wielding a baton behind a shield emblazoned with a lightning bolt-like “SS”, raised questions about the heavy-handed police response to protests, demonstrating how student movements appropriated and subverted official visual languages to create what Atelier Populaire declared… should not be taken as the final outcome of an experience, but as an inducement for finding, through contact with the masses, new levels of action both on the cultural and the political plane. As shown in Table 5, these movements developed distinctive visual strategies that differentiated them from state propaganda while creating new forms of political expression that continue to influence contemporary activist aesthetics.
Table 5. Non-Governmental Visual Innovation During the Cold War (1958-1989)
| Movement Type | Key Visual Innovations | Distribution Methods | Symbolic Repertoire | Lasting Impact |
| Peace Movement (CND) | Minimalist design aesthetic; universal symbol creation | Four-day marches from Trafalgar Square to Aldermaston; button/badge culture | Peace symbol; nuclear mushroom cloud inversions | Global adoption of peace iconography; template for protest branding |
| Environmental Movement | Photographic documentation; ecological imagery | Underground publications; direct action visuals | Earth imagery; pollution visualization; species preservation | Foundation for contemporary climate activism aesthetics |
| Student Movement (1968) | Silkscreen workshops… established… resorted to every available printing medium | Street poster campaigns; occupied spaces as galleries | Tools of the proletariat, including the hammer, the spanner, the paintbrush | Democratization of political art; DIY aesthetic legitimation |
| Feminist Movement | Body politics visualization; consciousness-raising graphics | Alternative press networks; collective production | Female symbols reimagined; domestic space politicized | Gender-inclusive design principles; intersectional visual strategies |
The transformative impact of these non-governmental movements extended beyond immediate political objectives to fundamentally alter the relationship between visual culture and political expression, establishing what recent scholarship identifies as “prefigurative politics” that, as Tornberg [34]explains, refers to strategies that “model a future society on a micro level and aim to instantiate radical social change” through embodying “those forms of social relations, decision-making, culture, and human experience that are the ultimate goal” within their very production processes.
5. Comparative Analysis: Ideological Contest of Visual Languages
5.1 Oppositional Construction of Symbol Systems
The oppositional construction of symbol systems during the Cold War manifested through fundamentally divergent chromatic, iconographic, and compositional strategies that encoded competing ideological worldviews within visual propaganda, creating what contemporary scholars characterize as “semiotic warfare” wherein identical signifiers carried antithetical meanings across the Iron Curtain. The “red threat” emanating from the east was at the heart of the American propaganda that aimed to distract the public from the politics of colour at home, demonstrating how chromatic symbolism operated differentially—while Eastern bloc nations deployed red as revolutionary vitality and collective sacrifice, Western propaganda transformed the same hue into visceral representations of existential menace and totalitarian oppression. This chromatic opposition was extended to cover whole color schemes, with socialist propaganda employing warm, saturated hues expressing the ideas of togetherness and advancement, in direct contrast to Western choices of cool blues and whites that signified liberty and reason. However, similar to the era of perestroika under Mikhail Gorbachev in the 1980s, when the demise of the Cold War first became noticeable, the color red came under reconsideration in the avant-garde art tendencies of the time, presaging the ultimate collapse of these strict symbolic dichotomies.
The production of idealized images of human subjects expressed profound philosophical disagreements in notions of collective identity and personal agency. Eastern propaganda depicted gigantic workers whose facial details faded into anonymity dissolved individual identity into a collective class consciousness, while Western posters celebrated individualized consumers whose unique characteristics underscored personal choice and self-determination. As seen in Table 6, these various approaches were manifested in the systematic differences of viewpoint, spatial relationships, and compositional hierarchies that established fundamentally different representations of political power and social organization.
Table 6. Oppositional Symbol Systems in Cold War Visual Propaganda
| Symbolic Element | Eastern Bloc Construction | Western Construction | Ideological Function |
| Chromatic Coding | Red = revolutionary progress; Yellow = agricultural abundance; Black = defeated enemies | Red = communist threat; Blue = freedom/democracy; White = purity/peace | Color psychology manipulates emotional response and group identification |
| Human Typology | Collective heroes; Generic features; Occupational uniforms; Upward gazing | Individual achievers; Distinctive faces; Casual clothing; Direct eye contact | Encodes concepts of agency, identity, and social aspiration |
| Spatial Composition | Pyramidal hierarchy; Low angle views; Centralized focus; Monumental scale | Horizontal democracy; Eye-level perspective; Distributed elements; Human scale | Establishes power relationships between viewer and ideological authority |
| Symbolic Objects | Tools of production; Agricultural products; Industrial machinery; Red flags | Consumer goods; Suburban homes; Automobiles; National flags | Material culture represents competing visions of prosperity and progress |
5.2 Historical Evolution of Narrative Strategies
The story of the Cold War historical process developed in a radical way across three periods, each characterized by specific rhetorical templates and iconographic motifs that spoke to shifting geopolitics and technology. The era of confrontation (1945-1962) saw the two superpowers creating very different narratives, boiling complex world relations into naive simplistic binary moral oppositions like good and evil, democracy and tyranny, and freedom and oppression. This reductionist explanatory framework prompted scholars to invoke “apocalyptic simplification,” whereby the potential for nuclear annihilation was a common theme in the general metanarrative, thereby legitimizing extremist ideologies and eliminating middle ground. The détente years (1963-1979) were marked by the gradual evolution of propaganda narratives covering cultural exchanges, diplomatic cooperation, and mutual technological advancements, symbolized by the Apollo-Soyuz mission. This transition required fewer blatant characterizations of the enemy, as well as aspects of human nature, reason, and even collaboration, thus undermining the original policy of demonization while still ensuring requisite ideological distinctions, a process referred to as “competitive coexistence” today. The third era (1980-1991) was marked by narrative policy incoherence, with Western propaganda becoming increasingly triumphalist, inventing concepts of inevitability victory based on economic superiority and cultural vibrancy. Eastern bloc fiction, on the other hand, shifted towards more apologist genres, emphasizing peace activism and possible paths to reform. Both, however, struggled with narrative coherence, as incoherence at home and increasing complexity abroad challenged traditional Cold War scripts. This, in turn, became what current historians view as “narrative exhaustion,” an introduction to systemic collapse.
Figure 34: Evolution of Cold War Narrative Strategies (1945-1991)
Note: This conceptual graph depicts overall trends on the basis of qualitative analysis of propaganda development instead of quantitative assessment. The trend lines indicate interpretive synthesis of historical tendencies determined through comparative analysis of the poster corpus.
The figure 34 illustrates three key narrative dimensions across Cold War periods: Binary Opposition (red line) shows the decline of simplistic us-versus-them narratives; Narrative Sophistication (blue line) demonstrates increasing complexity in propaganda messaging; and Ideological Certainty (orange line) reveals the paradoxical erosion of confidence as the Cold War progressed. Key historical events are marked to show their correlation with narrative shifts.
5.3 Communication Mechanisms and Audience Reception
The Cold War communications highlighted profound divergences in the way that the Eastern and Western blocs’ mechanisms of propaganda understood audience agency and reception processes. Media theorists of today have used the term “asymmetrical communication ecologies” to describe the phenomenon. Under socialist regimes, state-linked media circulated through centralized distribution systems, thus imposing unity of messages and limiting feedback loops. In contrast, the pluralistic consumer society of the Western world allowed for a coexistence of a disparate range of viewpoints, subject to the limitations of market forces and corporate interests. In the difference between the obligatory mobilization associated with propaganda efforts of the Eastern bloc—requiring participation in political rallies, parades, and collectively consumed rituals—and the ostensibly voluntary engagement model inherent in Western consumer capitalism, the complexity of the ideological interpellations working in each system was occluded. In the capitalist model, propaganda was carried out through what Deleuze called “societies of control,” aiming not to command, but to manage conformity.
The essential split in communication theory led to unexpected cross-cultural misunderstandings and unintended consequences, particularly evident in the ways in which Western consumer imagery was translated into fetishized images of freedom in Eastern Europe, while socialist collective imagery was romantically reinterpreted by Western left movements. This demonstrates what modern scholarship identifies as the process of “productive misunderstanding,” whereby the effectiveness of propaganda often lay not in its initial message but in the inventive reappropriation of symbols by audiences across ideological borders. This phenomenon ultimately points to the inherent instability of meaning in transcultural communication contexts.
5.4 Triangular Relationship of Technology, Aesthetics and Politics
This tripartite multilateral interaction among technology, aesthetics, and politics in the Cold War was a bidirectionally interactive system in which each essentially affected and was affected by the others to produce what current researchers refer to as “techno-aesthetic regimes” that legitimized particular ideological positions through material practice and visual representation [35]. Print technologies did not only act as politically neutral pipes for the transmission of propaganda but as politically charged apparatuses where socialist nations’ emphasis on mass-produced lithography and woodcuts inscribed values of folk culture and community against Western preferences for advanced offset printing that highlighted individual creativity and commercial sophistication, showing how material production processes themselves transmitted political meaning.
The political use of claims of photographic realism engendered competing epistemological models for vision-based evidence. Eastern bloc nations employed heavily manipulated photographs that celebrated collective achievements, but Western propaganda emphasized the supposed openness of spontaneous photography. Both regimes effectively used the indexical potential of the medium to fashion competing realities, a process that recent scholarship has termed “dueling photographic ontologies.” Here, technological potentiality and aesthetic choice intersected to make possible the building of rival regimes of truth. This was a triangular relationship, where it operated through infinitely looping feedback processes whereby technological innovations opened up new possibilities for the aesthetic that, in their turn, legitimized political structures. On the other hand, political needs drove the call for technological innovation as well as aesthetic innovation, going into an infinite cycle of reciprocal support. This suggests that the Cold War visual cultures did not come into being from sheer top-down ideological dictate but through complicated negotiations between material possibilities, aesthetic conventions, and political pressures.
6. Conclusion
A close analysis of Cold War propaganda posters discloses fundamental trends within the visual construction of ideology, which functioned through culturally particular yet globally intelligible modes of symbolic opposition and aesthetic provocation. This study illustrates that the Eastern and Western blocs developed distinct visual languages that existed side by side as historical records of twentieth-century political culture and as live instruments of the production of ideological subjects. In this case, the dialectic between political need and technological advance led to the development of increasingly complex systems of propaganda, which transcended the mere representation of fixed political standpoints to become key factors in the very articulation of Cold War consciousness.
The scholarly significance of this work is not simply one of historical record but of opening up new paradigms for analysis of the visual elements of political communication, contributing to the broader “visual turn” in political science, and our understanding of how ideological systems are instantiated through aesthetic media. The analytical framework formulated here enables a systematic investigation of how rival political orders used visual strategies that, although they had opposing goals, had fundamental structural similarities in their use of color symbolism, spatial composition, and iconographic vocabularies. This convergence substantially enhances the interdisciplinary exchange between studies of design and historical scholarship, through methodological innovation spanning formerly separate fields of inquiry.
The reiteration of Cold War visual strategies in today’s digital propaganda brings to mind the continued applicability of those earlier methods in making sense of image-oriented political manipulation under conditions of algorithmic distribution and post-truth communication dynamics. The research acknowledges inherent limitations arising from archival imbalances between Eastern and Western sources, interpretive challenges posed by linguistic and cultural barriers, and the methodological complexities of analyzing visual materials whose meanings shift across temporal and geographical contexts, suggesting future research directions that integrate digital humanities approaches with oral history methodologies to construct more nuanced understandings of how propaganda images functioned within lived experience rather than merely as artifacts of state power.
References
[1] T. Phu, E. Duganne, D. Nguyen, and K. Thomas, “Cold War Visual Legacies,” Journal of War & Culture Studies, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 95-103, 2025.
[2] W. Theisen, M. Yankoski, K. Hook, E. Verdeja, W. Scheirer, and T. Weninger, “Visual narratives and political instability: a case study of visual media prior to the Russia-Ukraine conflict,” Information, Communication & Society, pp. 1-23, 04/20 2025.
[3] Y. Gu, “Cold War, the Chinese State Photo Agency, and the Socialist Network of Affective News Photo,” Journal of War & Culture Studies, vol. 18, pp. 1-21, 01/20 2025.
[4] W. Mitchell, “Picture Theory: Essays on Verbal and Visual Representation,” Bibliovault OAI Repository, the University of Chicago Press, vol. 28, 01/01 1995.
[5] B. Groys, “The Cold War Between Medium and Message,” Javnost – The Public, vol. 26, pp. 363-369, 10/02 2019.
[6] S. Gilfillan and J. Xidias, We now know: Rethinking Cold War history. 2017, pp. 1-85.
[7] J. Schofield, W. Cocroft, and M. Dobronovskaya, “Cold War: a Transnational Approach to a Global Heritage,” Post-Medieval Archaeology, vol. 55, pp. 39-58, 01/02 2021.
[8] C. Pfaff, “A Brief History of Proxy War Part II: The Cold War,” 2024, pp. 77-116.
[9] M. Wenderski, Art and Politics During the Cold War: Poland and the Netherlands. 2024.
[10] M. Azage, “Manufacturing Consent: The Political-Economy of Mass Media by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky,” SSRN Electronic Journal, 12/01 2011.
[11] L. Althusser, E. Balibar, and J. Bidet, On The Reproduction Of Capitalism: Ideology And Ideological State Apparatuses. 2014, p. 288.
[12] I. Blacksin, Conflicted: Making News from Global War. 2024.
[13] S. Luehrmann, “THE MODERNITY OF MANUAL REPRODUCTION: Soviet Propaganda and the Creative Life of Ideology,” Cultural Anthropology, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 363-388, 2011.
[14] G. Aiello, “Visual Semiotics: Key Concepts and New Directions,” 2020, pp. 367-380.
[15] B. Moffitt, “Taking Account of the Visual Politics of Populism,” Polity, vol. 54, pp. 000-000, 06/02 2022.
[16] J. Demuyakor, “The Propaganda Model in the Digital Age: A Review of Literature on the Effects of Social Media on News Production,” Shanlax International Journal of Arts Science and Humanities, vol. 8, pp. 1-7, 04/01 2021.
[17] L. Mathe and G. Motsaathebe, “Discursive Communities, Protest, Xenophobia, and Looting in South Africa: A Social Network Analysis,” Communicatio, vol. 48, pp. 102-126, 06/30 2022.
[18] E. Qadir, “Visual Rhetoric in Election Posters: A Multimodal Critical Discourse Analysis Approach,” Koya University Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, vol. 6, pp. 136-159, 11/30 2023.
[19] M. Mat Alim and R. Sulaiman, “Visual Rhetoric in Visual Communication: Theory and Concepts in Public Service Announcements Advertising Campaign,” International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 11, 09/11 2021.
[20] S. Bassnett, A. Noble, and T. Phu, “Cold War visual alliances,” Visual Studies, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 119-122, 2015.
[21] D. Yuna, L. Xiaokun, L. Jianing, and H. Lu, “Cross-Cultural Communication on Social Media: Review From the Perspective of Cultural Psychology and Neuroscience,” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 13, p. 858900, 03/08 2022.
[22] S. Aririguzoh, “Communication competencies, culture and SDGs: effective processes to cross-cultural communication,” Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, vol. 9, 03/23 2022.
[23] T. Batova, “Commentary on the Visual Design Challenges for Cross-Cultural Users of Business Data Visualizations,” International Journal of Business Communication, 02/26 2025.
[24] O. Hellmann and K. Oppermann, “Visualising state biographical narratives: A rhetorical analysis of Chinese and North Korean propaganda photographs,” The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, vol. 26, 10/28 2023.
[25] H. Zhang and S. Corse, “Staging communism: state control and the Chinese Model Opera,” American Journal of Cultural Sociology, vol. 7, pp. 1-22, 04/01 2019.
[26] X. Xiao, “The Role and Significance of Chinese Folk Paintings by Nunminhua in Propaganda and Education,” Философия и культура, pp. 133-146, 09/01 2022.
[27] J. McGrath, “Cultural Revolution Model Opera Films and the Realist Tradition in Chinese Cinema,” Opera Quarterly, vol. 26, pp. 343-376, 09/22 2010.
[28] Y. Ludden, “The transformation of Beijing opera: Jiang Qing, Yu Huiyong and yangbanxi,” Journal of Contemporary Chinese Art, vol. 4, pp. 143-160, 09/01 2017.
[29] J. Xu and Q. Gong, “‘Telling China’s Story Well’ as propaganda campaign slogan: International, domestic and the pandemic,” Media Culture & Society, vol. 46, 03/14 2024.
[30] S. Donald, “Red Aesthetics, Intermediality and the Use of Posters in Chinese Cinema after 1949,” Asian Studies Review, vol. 38, 10/01 2014.
[31] S. Scott-Brown, “An Artful Science: Activism, Non-Violence, and Radical Democracy in Cold War Britain,” Journal of Contemporary History, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 639-659, 2024.
[32] A. McGarry, I. Erhart, H. Eslen-Ziya, O. Jenzen, and U. Korkut, “Introduction: The Aesthetics of Global Protest : Visual Culture and Communication,” 2019.
[33] B. Barkela, T. Gil Lopez, and C. Klöckner, “A License to Disrupt? Artistic Activism in Environmental Public Dissent and Protest,” 2022, pp. 57-74.
[34] A. Tornberg, “Prefigurative politics and social change: a typology drawing on transition studies,” Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory, vol. 22, pp. 1-25, 02/05 2021.
[35] M. Kaneti, “Imagining Cooperation: Cold War Aesthetics for a Hot Planet,” Global Storytelling: Journal of Digital and Moving Images, vol. 2, 01/26 2023.