Joseph Overton described how ideas that were completely alien to society were lifted from the cesspool of public scorn, laundered, and eventually legislated.
According to the Overton Window of Opportunity, for every idea or problem in society there is a so-called. window of opportunity. Within this window, the idea may or may not be widely discussed, openly supported, promoted, or attempted to be enshrined in law. The window is moved, thereby changing the range of possibilities, from the “unthinkable” stage, that is, completely alien to public morality, completely rejected, to the “current politics” stage, that is, already widely discussed, accepted by the mass consciousness and enshrined in laws.
This is not brainwashing as such, but more subtle technologies. What makes them effective is their consistent, systematic application and the fact that the very fact of impact is invisible to the victim society.
Below I will use an example to explain how, step by step, society first begins to discuss something unacceptable, then considers it appropriate, and finally comes to terms with a new law that enshrines and protects the once unthinkable.
Let's take something completely unimaginable as an example. Let's say cannibalism, that is, the idea of legalizing the right of citizens to eat each other. A tough enough example?
But it is obvious to everyone that right now (2014) there is no way to expand the propaganda of cannibalism - society will rear up. This situation means that the problem of legalizing cannibalism is at the zero stage of the window of opportunity. This stage, according to Overton's theory, is called "The Unthinkable." Let us now simulate how this unthinkable will be realized, having gone through all the stages of the window of opportunity.
TECHNOLOGY
I repeat once again, Overton described a TECHNOLOGY that allows you to legalize absolutely any idea.
Pay attention! He did not propose a concept, he did not formulate his thoughts in some way - he described a working technology. That is, a sequence of actions, the execution of which invariably leads to the desired result. As a weapon for the destruction of human communities, such technology may be more effective than a thermonuclear charge.
HOW BOLD IS THIS!
The topic of cannibalism is still disgusting and completely unacceptable in society. It is undesirable to discuss this topic either in the press or, especially, in decent company. For now, this is an unthinkable, absurd, forbidden phenomenon. Accordingly, the first movement of the Overton Window is to move the topic of cannibalism from the realm of the unthinkable to the realm of the radical.
We do have freedom of speech.
Well, why not talk about cannibalism?
Scientists are generally supposed to talk about everything - there are no taboo topics for scientists, they are supposed to study everything. And since this is the case, we will convene an ethnological symposium on the topic “Exotic rituals of the tribes of Polynesia.” We will discuss the history of the subject on it, introduce it into scientific circulation and we get the fact of an authoritative statement about cannibalism.
You see, it turns out that you can talk about cannibalism in a meaningful way and, as it were, remain within the limits of scientific respectability.
The Overton window has already moved. That is, a revision of positions has already been indicated. This ensures a transition from an irreconcilably negative attitude of society to a more positive attitude.
Simultaneously with the pseudo-scientific discussion, some kind of “Society of Radical Cannibals” should certainly appear. And even if it is presented only on the Internet, radical cannibals will certainly be noticed and quoted in all the necessary media.
Firstly, this is another fact of the statement. And secondly, shocking scumbags of such a special genesis are needed to create the image of a radical scarecrow. These will be “bad cannibals” as opposed to another bogeyman - “fascists calling for people not like them to be burned at the stake.” But more on scarecrows below. To begin with, it is enough to publish stories about what British scientists and some radical scumbags of a different nature think about eating human flesh.
The result of the first movement of the Overton Window: an unacceptable topic was introduced into circulation, a taboo was desacralized, the unambiguity of the problem was destroyed - “gradations of gray” were created.
WHY NOT?
At this stage we continue to quote “scientists”. After all, you can’t turn away from knowledge, right? About cannibalism. Anyone who refuses to discuss this should be branded a bigot and a hypocrite.
Condemning bigotry, it is imperative to come up with an elegant name for cannibalism. So that all sorts of fascists do not dare to label dissidents with the word starting with the letter “Ka”.
Attention! Creating a euphemism is very important point. To legalize an unthinkable idea, it is necessary to replace its real name.
No more cannibalism.
Now this is called, for example, anthropophagy. But this term will very soon be replaced again, recognizing this definition as offensive.
The purpose of inventing new names is to divert the essence of the problem from its designation, to tear the form of a word from its content, to deprive one’s ideological opponents of language. Cannibalism turns into anthropophagy, and then into anthropophilia, just as a criminal changes surnames and passports.
In parallel with the game of names, a supporting precedent is created - historical, mythological, current or simply fictitious, but most importantly - legitimized. It will be found or invented as "proof" that anthropophilia can in principle be legitimized.
“Remember the legend about the selfless mother who gave her blood to her children dying of thirst?”
"And the stories ancient gods, who ate everyone in a row - among the Romans this was in the order of things!”
“Well, among the Christians who are closer to us, especially with anthropophilia, everything is in order. in perfect order! They still ritually drink the blood and eat the flesh of their god. You're not blaming someone for something. Christian Church? Who the hell are you?”
The main task of the bacchanalia of this stage is to at least partially remove the eating of people from criminal prosecution. At least once, at least at some historical moment.
THAT'S WHAT IT SHOULD BE
Once a legitimating precedent has been provided, it becomes possible to move the Overton Window from the territory of the possible to the realm of the rational.
This is the third stage. It completes the fragmentation of a single problem.
“The desire to eat people is genetically inherent, it is in human nature”
“Sometimes it is necessary to eat a person, there are insurmountable circumstances”
"There are people who want to be eaten"
“Anthropophiles have been provoked!”
"The forbidden fruit is always sweet"
“A free person has the right to decide what he eats”
“Don’t hide information and let everyone understand who they are - an anthropophile or an anthropophobe”
“Is there any harm in anthropophilia? Its inevitability has not been proven.”
A “battlefield” for the problem is artificially created in the public consciousness. Scarecrows are placed on the extreme flanks - radical supporters and radical opponents of cannibalism that have appeared in a special way.
Real opponents - that is normal people those who do not want to remain indifferent to the problem of the eradication of cannibalism - they try to pack them together with scarecrows and write them down as radical haters. The role of these scarecrows is to actively create the image of crazy psychopaths - aggressive, fascist haters of anthropophilia, calling for the burning alive of cannibals, Jews, communists and blacks. Presence in the media is ensured by all of the above, except for real opponents of legalization.
In this situation, the so-called Anthropophiles remain, as it were, in the middle between the scarecrows, on the “territory of reason,” from where, with all the pathos of “sanity and humanity,” they condemn “fascists of all stripes.”
“Scientists” and journalists at this stage are proving that humanity has eaten each other from time to time throughout its history, and this is normal. Now the topic of anthropophilia can be transferred from the realm of the rational to the category of the popular. The Overton window moves on.
IN A GOOD SENSE
To popularize the topic of cannibalism, it is necessary to support it with pop content, pairing it with historical and mythological figures, and, if possible, with modern media personalities.
Anthropophilia is permeating the news and talk shows en masse. People are eaten in wide-release movies, song lyrics, and video clips.
One of the popularization techniques is called “Look around!”
"Didn't you know that one famous composer- that?.. anthropophile.”
“And one well-known Polish screenwriter was an anthropophile all his life, he was even persecuted.”
“And how many of them were in psychiatric hospitals! How many millions were deported, deprived of citizenship!.. By the way, how do you like Lady Gaga’s new video “Eat me, baby”?
At this stage, the topic being developed is brought to the TOP and it begins to autonomously reproduce itself in the mass media, show business and politics.
Another effective technique: the essence of the problem is actively discussed at the level of information operators (journalists, TV show hosts, social activists, etc.), cutting off specialists from the discussion.
Then, at the moment when everyone has become bored and the discussion of the problem has reached a dead end, a specially selected professional comes and says: “Gentlemen, in fact, everything is not like that at all. And the point is not that, but this. And this and that must be done” - and meanwhile gives a very definite direction, the tendentiousness of which is set by the “Windows” movement.
To justify supporters of legalization, they use the humanization of criminals through the creation of positive image through characteristics not associated with crime.
"This is creative people. Well, he ate his wife, so what?”
“They truly love their victims. He eats, that means he loves!”
“Anthropophiles have a high IQ and otherwise adhere to strict morals.”
“Anthropophiles are victims themselves, life forced them”
“They were raised that way,” etc.
This kind of trickery is the salt of popular talk shows.
"We'll tell you tragic story love! He wanted to eat her! And she just wanted to be eaten! Who are we to judge them? Perhaps this is love? Who are you to stand in the way of love?!”
WE ARE THE AUTHORITY HERE
The Overton Window movement moves to the fifth stage when the topic is heated to the point of being able to move it from the category of popular to the sphere of current politics.
Preparations begin legislative framework. Lobbyist groups in power are consolidating and emerging from the shadows. Opinion polls are published that allegedly confirm a high percentage of supporters of the legalization of cannibalism. Politicians are beginning to roll out trial balloons of public statements on the topic of legislative enshrinement of this topic. A new dogma is being introduced into the public consciousness - “the prohibition of eating people is prohibited.”
This is the signature dish of liberalism - tolerance as a ban on taboos, a ban on correction and prevention of deviations that are destructive to society.
During last stage The window movement from the category of “popular” to “current politics”, society has already been broken. The most living part of him will somehow resist the legislative consolidation of things that were not so long ago unthinkable. But in general, society is already broken. It has already accepted its defeat.
Laws have been adopted, the norms of human existence have been changed (destroyed), then echoes of this topic will inevitably reach schools and kindergartens, which means the next generation will grow up with no chance of survival at all. This happened with the legalization of pederasty (now they demand to call themselves gay). Now, before our eyes, Europe is legalizing incest and child euthanasia.
Every day, thousands of people flock to Moscow from regions and neighboring countries to work. Some of them disappear without a trace, not having time to leave the capital's station. " New newspaper» studied the Russian labor slavery market.
Those who fight
Oleg asks not to name the place of our meeting or even the region. The case takes place in the industrial zone of a small town. Oleg “guides” me by phone, and when I reach the “Tire Service” sign, he says: “Wait, I’ll be right there.” Arrives in 10 minutes.
It's not easy to find you.
That's all we're counting on.
The conversation takes place behind a plywood shed. There are garages and warehouses around.
I started fighting slavery in 2011,” says Oleg. - A friend told me how she bought a relative from a brick factory in Dagestan. I didn’t believe it, but it became interesting. I went myself. In Dagestan, I visited factories with local kids, posing as a brick buyer. At the same time, I asked the workers if there were any forced laborers among them. It turned out yes. With those who were not afraid, we agreed to escape. Then they managed to take out five people.
After the release of the first slaves, Oleg sent out a press release to the media. But the topic did not arouse interest.
Only one activist from the League of Free Cities movement got in touch: they have a small newspaper - about two hundred people probably read it. But after the publication, a woman from Kazakhstan called me and told me that her relative was being held in a grocery store in Golyanovo ( district in Moscow. - I.Zh.). Remember this scandal? Unfortunately, it was the only one, and even ineffective - the case was closed.
About how much the topic of human trafficking worries Russians, Oleg says this:
For last month We collected only 1,730 rubles, but spent about seventy thousand. We invest our money in the project: I work at a factory, there is a guy who works as a loader in a warehouse. The Dagestan coordinator works in a hospital.
Oleg Melnikov in Dagestan. Photo: Vk.com
Currently there are 15 activists in Alternative.
In less than four years, we freed about three hundred slaves,” says Oleg.
According to Alternatives, in Russia every year labor slavery About 5,000 people are captured; in total there are almost 100,000 forced laborers in the country.
How do you get into slavery?
The average statistical portrait of a Russian forced laborer, according to Oleg, is this: this is a person from the provinces who does not understand labor relations, willing better life and ready to work for this as anyone.
A person who came to Moscow without a specific plan, but with a specific goal, is immediately visible, says Oleg. - Recruiters work at the capital's train stations. The most active is in Kazansky. A recruiter approaches a person and asks if he needs a job? If necessary, the recruiter offers good earnings in the south: from thirty to seventy thousand rubles. The region is not named. They say about the nature of the work: “unskilled worker” or something else that does not require high qualifications. The main thing is a good salary.
The recruiter offers you a drink during the meeting. It doesn't have to be alcohol, you can also have tea.
They go to the station cafe, where there are agreements with the waiters. Barbiturates are poured into the recruit's cup - under these substances a person can remain unconscious for up to a day and a half. After the drug has begun to act, the person is put on a bus and taken away in the right direction.
Oleg tested the scheme for getting into slavery on himself. To do this, he lived at the Kazansky railway station for two weeks, masquerading as a homeless person.
This was in October 2013. At first I tried to pretend to be a visitor, but it didn’t look convincing. Then I decided to play a homeless person. Usually slave traders do not touch the homeless, but I was new at the station, and on October 18, a man approached me who introduced himself as Musa. Said he had good job in the Caspian Sea, three hours a day. He promised 50,000 a month. I agreed. We drove in his car to the Prince Plaza shopping center near the Teply Stan metro station. There Musa handed me over to a man named Ramazan. I saw Ramadan give money to Musa. I couldn’t see exactly how much. Then Ramazan and I went to the village of Mamyri, near the village of Mosrentgen in the Moscow region. There I saw a bus to Dagestan and refused to go, saying that I knew there was slavery there. But Ramazan said that money had already been paid for me and it needed to either be returned or worked off. And to calm me down, he offered me a drink. I agreed. We went to a nearby cafe and drank some alcohol. Then I don’t remember well. All this time my activist friends were watching us. At the 33rd kilometer of the Moscow Ring Road, they blocked the way for the bus, and they took me to the Sklifosovsky Institute, where I lay under a drip for four days. I was prescribed the antipsychotic azaleptin. A criminal case was opened, but it is still being investigated...
There are no markets as such, no platforms where people could be bought,” says Zakir, coordinator of Alternative in Dagestan. - People are taken “to order”: the owner of the factory told the slave trader that he needed two people - they would bring two to the factory. But there are still two places in Makhachkala where slaves are most often brought and from where their owners take them: this is the bus station behind the Pyramid cinema and the Northern Station. We have a lot of evidence and even video recordings on this matter, but law enforcement agencies are not interested in them. We tried to contact the police but were refused to initiate cases.
In fact, the slave trade is not only Dagestan, says Oleg. - Slave labor is used in many regions: Yekaterinburg, Lipetsk region, Voronezh, Barnaul, Gorno-Altaisk. In February and April of this year, we freed people from a construction site in Novy Urengoy.
Returned
Andrey Erisov (in the foreground) and Vasily Gaidenko. Photo: Ivan Zhilin / Novaya Gazeta
Vasily Gaidenko and Andrey Yerisov were released by Alternative activists from a brick factory on August 10. They traveled from Dagestan to Moscow by bus for two days. Activist Alexey and I met them on the morning of August 12 in the parking lot of the Lyublino market.
Came to Moscow from Orenburg. At the Kazansky station I approached the security guard and asked if they needed employees? He said that he didn’t know and that he would ask the boss, who was not there at the moment. While I was waiting, a Russian guy approached me, introduced himself as Dima and asked if I was looking for a job? He said that he would get me a job as a security guard in Moscow. He offered me a drink.
Andrei woke up already on the bus, two more slaves were traveling with him. Everyone was brought to the Zarya-1 plant in the Karabudakhkent region of Dagestan.
At the plant, everyone works where the owner says. I transported bricks on a tractor. I also had to work as a loader. Working day from eight in the morning to eight in the evening. No days off.
If someone gets tired or, God forbid, gets injured, the owner doesn’t care,” says Vasily and shows a huge ulcer on his foot. I'm when Jangiru (that was the name of the owner of the plant, he died a month ago) showed that my leg was swelling, he said: “Apply plantain.”
Nobody treats sick slaves in brick factories: if the condition is very serious and the person cannot work, he is taken to the hospital and left at the entrance.
The slave's usual food is pasta, says Vasily. - But the portions are large.
At Zarya-1, according to Vasily and Andrey, 23 people were forced to work. We lived in a barracks - four in one room.
Andrey tried to escape. He didn’t get far: in Kaspiysk he was caught by the foreman. Returned it to the factory, but didn't beat it.
The relatively mild conditions at Zarya-1 (they are fed tolerably and not beaten) are due to the fact that this plant is one of four legally operating in Dagestan. In total, according to Alternative, there are about 200 brick factories in the republic, and the vast majority of them are not registered.
In illegal factories, slaves have much less luck. In the "Alternatives" archive there is a story by Olesya and Andrey - two prisoners of the plant under code name"Crystal" (located between Makhachkala and Kaspiysk).
“They didn’t beat me, but they strangled me once,” Olesya says in a video recording. - It was Brigadier Kurban. He told me: “Go, carry buckets, bring water to water the trees.” And I replied that I’ll rest now and bring it. He said I couldn't rest. I continued to be indignant. Then he started strangling me, and then promised to drown me in the river.”
Olesya was pregnant at the time she fell into slavery. “Having learned about this, Magomed, the plant manager, decided not to do anything. After some time, due to hard work, I began to have problems in the female area. I complained to Magomed for more than two weeks before he took me to the hospital. The doctors said that there was a very high probability of miscarriage and demanded that I be kept in the hospital for treatment. But Magomed took me back and forced me to work. When I was pregnant, I carried ten-liter buckets of sand.”
Alternative volunteers managed to free Olesya from slavery. The woman kept the child.
“The liberation of people does not always resemble some kind of action-packed detective story,” activists say. “Often, the owners of factories prefer not to interfere with us, because the business is completely illegal and has no serious patrons.”
About patrons
According to Alternative volunteers, there is no serious “cover” for human trafficking in Russia.
Everything happens at the level of district police officers, junior officers who simply turn a blind eye to problems,” says Oleg.
The Dagestan authorities expressed their attitude to the problem of slavery in 2013 through the then Minister of Press and Information Nariman Gadzhiev. After the release of more slaves by Alternative activists, Gadzhiev said:
“The fact that slaves work in all factories in Dagestan is a kind of cliche. Here is the situation: activists said that at two factories in the village of Krasnoarmeisky, citizens from central Russia, Belarus and Ukraine. We asked operatives of the Ministry of Internal Affairs for the Republic of Dagestan to check this information, which was done within just a few hours. The operatives arrived, gathered teams, found out who the newcomer was. And the word “slaves” turned out to be more than inappropriate. Yes, there were problems with salaries: people, in general, were not paid, some actually did not have documents. But they worked voluntarily.”
"Money? I buy everything for them myself."
“Alternative” volunteers gave Novaya’s correspondent two phones, one of which belongs to the owner of a brick factory, where, according to activists, involuntary labor is used; and the second - to a reseller of people.
I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. “I help people find work,” a reseller nicknamed “Maga Merchant” reacted violently to my call. - I don’t work in factories, I don’t know what’s going on there. They simply ask me: help me find people. And I'm looking.
The “merchant,” according to him, had not heard anything about barbiturates mixed into drinks for future slaves. For “help in the search” he receives 4-5 thousand rubles per head.
Magomed, nicknamed “Komsomolets,” who owns a factory in the village of Kirpichny, upon hearing the reason for my call, immediately hung up. However, in the archives of Alternative there is an interview with the owner of a brick factory in the village of Mekegi, Levashinsky district, Magomedshapi Magomedov, who describes the attitude of the factory owners towards forced labor. Four people were released from Magomedov's plant in May 2013.
“I didn’t force anyone. How can we talk about retention when the plant is located right next to the road? - Magomedov says on the record. - I met them in the parking lot near the Pyramid cinema and offered them a job. They agreed. He took the documents because they are drunk and they will lose more. Money? I bought everything for them myself: so they give me a list of what they need - I buy them everything.”
Officially
Law enforcement agencies officially confirm the fact of low activity in the fight against the slave trade. From the report of the Main Criminal Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation (November 2014):
“In the fall of 2013, the Australian human rights organization Walk Free Foundation published a ranking of countries regarding the situation related to slave labor, in which Russia was assigned 49th position. According to the organization, there are about 500 thousand people in Russia in one form or another of slavery<…>
Performance analysis law enforcement agencies Russian Federation on combating human trafficking and the use of slave labor indicates that since the introduction of Articles 127-1 (trafficking in persons) and 127-2 (use of slave labor) into the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in December 2003, the number of persons recognized as victims under these articles of the Criminal Code , remains insignificant - 536.
In addition, since 2004, that is, over the last 10 years, 727 crimes have been registered under Article 127-1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which annually amounts to less than one tenth of one percent of all registered crimes.
Analysis of the state of crime in the sphere of human trafficking and slave trade indicates a high latency of these criminal acts, therefore official statistical indicators do not fully reflect the actual state of affairs.”
Press center of the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs:
In January-December 2014, employees of internal affairs bodies registered 468 cases of unlawful deprivation of liberty (Article 127 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), 25 cases of human trafficking (Article 127 - 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and 7 crimes under Art. 127-2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
Have you ever heard of the Overton Window? If not, then I recommend reading this technology for legalizing anything. You will understand how homosexuality and same-sex marriage are legalized. It will become quite obvious that the work of legalizing pedophilia and incest will be completed in Europe in the coming years. Just like child euthanasia, by the way.
Joseph Overton described how ideas that were completely alien to society were lifted from the cesspool of public scorn, laundered, and eventually legislated.
According to the Overton Window of Opportunity, for every idea or problem in society there is a so-called. window of opportunity. Within this window, the idea may or may not be widely discussed, openly supported, promoted, or attempted to be enshrined in law. The window is moved, thereby changing the range of possibilities, from the “unthinkable” stage, that is, completely alien to public morality, completely rejected, to the “current politics” stage, that is, already widely discussed, accepted by the mass consciousness and enshrined in laws.
This is not brainwashing as such, but more subtle technologies. What makes them effective is their consistent, systematic application and the fact that the very fact of impact is invisible to the victim society.
Below I will use an example to explain how, step by step, society first begins to discuss something unacceptable, then considers it appropriate, and finally comes to terms with a new law that enshrines and protects the once unthinkable.
Let's take something completely unimaginable as an example. Let's say cannibalism, that is, the idea of legalizing the right of citizens to eat each other. A tough enough example?
But it is obvious to everyone that right now (2014) there is no way to expand the propaganda of cannibalism - society will rear up. This situation means that the problem of legalizing cannibalism is at the zero stage of the window of opportunity. This stage, according to Overton's theory, is called "The Unthinkable." Let us now simulate how this unthinkable will be realized, having gone through all the stages of the window of opportunity.
TECHNOLOGY
I repeat once again, Overton described a TECHNOLOGY that allows you to legalize absolutely any idea.
Pay attention! He did not propose a concept, he did not formulate his thoughts in some way - he described a working technology. That is, a sequence of actions, the execution of which invariably leads to the desired result. As a weapon for the destruction of human communities, such technology may be more effective than a thermonuclear charge.
HOW BOLD IS THIS!
The topic of cannibalism is still disgusting and completely unacceptable in society. It is undesirable to discuss this topic either in the press or, especially, in decent company. For now, this is an unthinkable, absurd, forbidden phenomenon. Accordingly, the first movement of the Overton Window is to move the topic of cannibalism from the realm of the unthinkable to the realm of the radical.
We do have freedom of speech.
Well, why not talk about cannibalism?
Scientists are generally supposed to talk about everything - there are no taboo topics for scientists, they are supposed to study everything. And since this is the case, we will convene an ethnological symposium on the topic “Exotic rituals of the tribes of Polynesia.” We will discuss the history of the subject, introduce it into scientific circulation and obtain the fact of an authoritative statement about cannibalism.
You see, it turns out that you can talk about cannibalism in a meaningful way and, as it were, remain within the limits of scientific respectability.
The Overton window has already moved. That is, a revision of positions has already been indicated. This ensures a transition from an irreconcilably negative attitude of society to a more positive attitude.
Simultaneously with the pseudo-scientific discussion, some kind of “Society of Radical Cannibals” should certainly appear. And even if it is presented only on the Internet, radical cannibals will certainly be noticed and quoted in all the necessary media.
Firstly, this is another fact of the statement. And secondly, shocking scumbags of such a special genesis are needed to create the image of a radical scarecrow. These will be “bad cannibals” as opposed to another bogeyman - “fascists calling for people not like them to be burned at the stake.” But more on scarecrows below. To begin with, it is enough to publish stories about what British scientists and some radical scumbags of a different nature think about eating human flesh.
The result of the first movement of the Overton Window: an unacceptable topic was introduced into circulation, a taboo was desacralized, the unambiguity of the problem was destroyed - “gradations of gray” were created.
WHY NOT?
At this stage we continue to quote “scientists”. After all, you can’t turn away from knowledge, right? About cannibalism. Anyone who refuses to discuss this should be branded a bigot and a hypocrite.
Condemning bigotry, it is imperative to come up with an elegant name for cannibalism. So that all sorts of fascists do not dare to label dissidents with the word starting with the letter “Ka”.
Attention! Creating a euphemism is a very important point. To legalize an unthinkable idea, it is necessary to replace its real name.
No more cannibalism.
Now this is called, for example, anthropophagy. But this term will very soon be replaced again, recognizing this definition as offensive.
The purpose of inventing new names is to divert the essence of the problem from its designation, to tear the form of a word from its content, to deprive one’s ideological opponents of language. Cannibalism turns into anthropophagy, and then into anthropophilia, just as a criminal changes surnames and passports.
In parallel with the game of names, a supporting precedent is created - historical, mythological, current or simply fictitious, but most importantly - legitimized. It will be found or invented as "proof" that anthropophilia can in principle be legitimized.
“Remember the legend about the selfless mother who gave her blood to her children dying of thirst?”
“And the stories of ancient gods who ate everyone in a row - among the Romans this was in the order of things!”
“Well, among the Christians who are closer to us, especially with anthropophilia, everything is in perfect order! They still ritually drink the blood and eat the flesh of their god. You're not blaming the Christian Church for something, are you? Who the hell are you?”
The main task of the bacchanalia of this stage is to at least partially remove the eating of people from criminal prosecution. At least once, at least at some historical moment.
THAT'S WHAT IT SHOULD BE
Once a legitimating precedent has been provided, it becomes possible to move the Overton Window from the territory of the possible to the realm of the rational.
This is the third stage. It completes the fragmentation of a single problem.
“The desire to eat people is genetically inherent, it is in human nature”
“Sometimes it is necessary to eat a person, there are insurmountable circumstances”
"There are people who want to be eaten"
“Anthropophiles have been provoked!”
"The forbidden fruit is always sweet"
“A free person has the right to decide what he eats”
“Don’t hide information and let everyone understand who they are - an anthropophile or an anthropophobe”
“Is there any harm in anthropophilia? Its inevitability has not been proven.”
A “battlefield” for the problem is artificially created in the public consciousness. Scarecrows are placed on the extreme flanks - radical supporters and radical opponents of cannibalism that have appeared in a special way.
They are trying to package real opponents - that is, normal people who do not want to remain indifferent to the problem of the eradication of cannibalism - together with scarecrows and write them down as radical haters. The role of these scarecrows is to actively create the image of crazy psychopaths - aggressive, fascist haters of anthropophilia, calling for the burning alive of cannibals, Jews, communists and blacks. Presence in the media is ensured by all of the above, except for real opponents of legalization.
In this situation, the so-called Anthropophiles remain, as it were, in the middle between the scarecrows, on the “territory of reason,” from where, with all the pathos of “sanity and humanity,” they condemn “fascists of all stripes.”
“Scientists” and journalists at this stage are proving that humanity has eaten each other from time to time throughout its history, and this is normal. Now the topic of anthropophilia can be transferred from the realm of the rational to the category of the popular. The Overton window moves on.
IN A GOOD SENSE
To popularize the topic of cannibalism, it is necessary to support it with pop content, pairing it with historical and mythological figures, and, if possible, with modern media personalities.
Anthropophilia is permeating the news and talk shows en masse. People are eaten in wide-release movies, song lyrics, and video clips.
One of the popularization techniques is called “Look around!”
“Didn’t you know that one famous composer is... an anthropophile.”
“And one well-known Polish screenwriter was an anthropophile all his life, he was even persecuted.”
“And how many of them were in psychiatric hospitals! How many millions were deported, deprived of citizenship!.. By the way, how do you like Lady Gaga’s new video “Eat me, baby”?
At this stage, the topic being developed is brought to the TOP and it begins to autonomously reproduce itself in the mass media, show business and politics.
Another effective technique: the essence of the problem is actively discussed at the level of information operators (journalists, TV show hosts, social activists, etc.), cutting off specialists from the discussion.
Then, at the moment when everyone has become bored and the discussion of the problem has reached a dead end, a specially selected professional comes and says: “Gentlemen, in fact, everything is not like that at all. And the point is not that, but this. And this and that must be done” - and meanwhile gives a very definite direction, the tendentiousness of which is set by the “Windows” movement.
To justify supporters of legalization, they use the humanization of criminals by creating a positive image of them through characteristics not associated with the crime.
“These are creative people. Well, he ate his wife, so what?”
“They truly love their victims. He eats, that means he loves!”
“Anthropophiles have a high IQ and otherwise adhere to strict morals.”
“Anthropophiles are victims themselves, life forced them”
“They were raised that way,” etc.
This kind of trickery is the salt of popular talk shows.
“We will tell you a tragic love story! He wanted to eat her! And she just wanted to be eaten! Who are we to judge them? Perhaps this is love? Who are you to stand in the way of love?!”
WE ARE THE AUTHORITY HERE
The Overton Window movement moves to the fifth stage when the topic is heated to the point of being able to move it from the category of popular to the sphere of current politics.
Preparation of the legislative framework begins. Lobbyist groups in power are consolidating and emerging from the shadows. Opinion polls are published that allegedly confirm a high percentage of supporters of the legalization of cannibalism. Politicians are beginning to roll out trial balloons of public statements on the topic of legislative enshrinement of this topic. A new dogma is being introduced into the public consciousness - “the prohibition of eating people is prohibited.”
This is the signature dish of liberalism - tolerance as a ban on taboos, a ban on correction and prevention of deviations that are destructive to society.
During the last stage of the Window's movement from the category of “popular” to “current politics,” society was already broken. The most living part of him will somehow resist the legislative consolidation of things that were not so long ago unthinkable. But in general, society is already broken. It has already accepted its defeat.
Laws have been adopted, the norms of human existence have been changed (destroyed), then echoes of this topic will inevitably reach schools and kindergartens, which means the next generation will grow up with no chance of survival at all. This happened with the legalization of pederasty (now they demand to call themselves gay). Now, before our eyes, Europe is legalizing incest and child euthanasia.
____________________
Joseph P. Overton (1960-2003), senior vice president of public policy at the Mackinac Center. Died in a plane crash. Formulated a model for changing the presentation of the problem in public opinion, posthumously called the Overton Window.
Ulrich Schneider
loaded
Part 2: How to resist the Overton Window technology!!!
Dehumanization as final goal, to make normal and commonplace what was previously impossible or forbidden for reasons of simple human morality - this is the essence of the technology called “Overton Window”. The details of this were discussed in the material “Destruction Technologies. Overton Window”, then an object lesson in this inhumane technique was presented ... by the employees of the Danish zoo, who killed and dismembered the giraffe Marius in the form of a show and even an anatomical theater for children.
Nstarikov.ru blog reader Evgeny Khavrenko wrote an article about how you can resist the Overton Window technology.
How to resist Overton Window technology
“The Overton Window technology is based on the basic weaknesses of almost any personality. The “beauty” of this technology is that it works even when you are aware of it. Usually manipulations stop working as soon as its true meaning is revealed. In this case, the impact on the subconscious occurs through the basic needs of a person.
I would describe the main levers of pressure on a person in this way:
1. Tolerance.
2. Euphemism.
3. Belonging to a pack.
5. Legal means correct.
Overton windows are based on basic needs people who are in Maslow's pyramid occupy places from 2 to 4 steps.
This is Maslow's Pyramid.
Physiological needs: hunger, thirst, sexual desire, etc.
Security needs: a feeling of confidence, freedom from fear and failure.
The need for belonging and love.
Esteem needs: achieving success, approval, recognition.
Cognitive needs: to know, to be able to, to explore.
Aesthetic needs: harmony, order, beauty.
The need for self-actualization: realizing one’s goals, abilities, developing one’s own personality.
Due to the fact that needs 2 to 4 are almost never satisfied fully and forever, they easily become the object of manipulation against almost any person.
Tolerance as an opportunity to introduce any, even the most disgusting, opinions into everyday life. The most interesting thing is that in the description of tolerance (Wikipedia), in addition to tolerance, there is another definition - voluntary enduring of suffering. It is this definition that is suitable for those people who are ready to put up with views opposing them, or rather, the imposition of these views on them as their own. It is the need for belonging and respect that makes us abandon our views for fear of causing aggression and discontent in our opponents.
Euphemism is a mandatory component for overcoming internal resistance. Roughly speaking, this is a life-saving stick that helps install inner balance between own values and completely opposite values imposed from outside. For example, in our culture, the rude word “Pederast” (from ancient Greek παις - “child”, “boy”, and ἐραστής - “loving”, that is, “loving boys”) is being replaced by a more neutral word"gay" And the phrases “My friend is gay” and “My friend is gay” have completely different emotional loads.
Belonging to a pack is a combination of needs - safety, belonging to society and the need for respect. Every person who speaks in front of an audience, makes a presentation, or makes a toast in a large company knows how difficult it is sometimes to withstand those few minutes when all eyes are turned to him. If you have such an experience, please remember it. Now imagine that you need to express your disagreement with all these people - respected and not so respected, friends and acquaintances, bosses and subordinates. At the same time, it is important to express disagreement without using euphemisms, otherwise you will not get the message across. exact meaning, but on the contrary you will confuse everything even more. Personally, I have rarely met people capable of such actions.
The illusion of authority is again an opportunity to try on your own views already partly imposed from outside. If there is a chill of disagreement inside me, “Authority” readily throws me a saving stick, taking responsibility upon itself. At the same time, it is enough for me to have the most general ideas about the “Authority” itself. There is absolutely no question of finding out information about a person or society; we are simply glad that he (it) has taken upon himself the heavy burden of our torment. IN lately“Authority” doesn’t even have personalities behind it. More and more often we hear - “scientists have discovered..., psychologists claim..., the party has declared...”, etc.
Legality is the supremacy of accepting alien norms. “From now on, I have the right to reproach others for not agreeing with me.” Thus, compensating in myself for what remains not characteristic of my personality. The more I accuse others of backwardness or provocation, the more stronger voice contradictions inside me. The famous psychiatrist K.G. Jung believed that fanaticism is a sign of repressed doubt. A person who is truly convinced that he is right is absolutely calm and can discuss the opposite point of view without a shadow of indignation. In the case of instilling other people's values, complete conviction does not occur; doubt has to be suppressed by convincing others. Legality gives every right to do this.
Consequences of the Overton Window technology
The most terrible consequence This technology is that a person loses harmony, receiving in its place endless internal disputes and torment. Because when introducing this technology, no one thinks about what would make the person himself happy. The purpose of technology is to obtain new, desired vector development.
After achieving the result, a lot of people are forced to maintain the illusion of accepting other people's values. People remain less and less human, losing touch with their roots and culture. In other words, a person turns from a strong tree into a tumbleweed, becoming just as dry and vulnerable.
We can find an example of this in high level suicide in developed countries. People, having high comfort, do not begin to feel happier, paying for it with humanity.
A friend of mine who grew up watching Hollywood films and glossy magazines always dreamed of having a big country house with double garage, swimming pool and wine cellar. On the way to this goal, he had to work hard, survive a heart attack and cancer, which he is still fighting. At the same time permanent employment 12 hours a day alienated him from his family. The wife, feeling offended but not daring to reproach him, focused on the children, trying to get there the warmth that she so lacked. Children, without the control of their father, feeling power over their mother, became more and more cynical egoists. Ultimately, he built the house he dreamed of, but after six months he admitted that he would give everything for the opportunity to return 8 years ago to the place where their family was so happy, living in a 2-room apartment, spending weekends and holidays together.
In his case, family closeness became the price he paid for high comfort and social status, and disappointment replaced energy. Social status, social recognition, comfort and security in themselves do not lead us to our happiness, and are not mandatory attributes of it. They are and should remain a means to an end, not the end itself, and disappointment comes when there is emptiness behind them.
Opposition to the Overton Window technology
First of all, you can resist by giving up the attempt to always and everywhere be “normal.” At the moment when the “individual” gives way to the “normal” we automatically convey own control into the wrong hands. IN best case scenario We strive to be convenient for others, and at worst we fall under targeted manipulation. It is the culture, morals, customs and foundations of our ancestors that help us find our individuality. Integrating this into modern life helps you stay connected to your own heritage. I don't encourage you to blindly follow long traditions, but only remember, preserve and respect them.
The concept of tolerance should only be used as a concept of tolerance, otherwise it is necessary to protect one’s borders. For example, it is quite acceptable to listen about European Gay parades, but refuse to accept official gay marriages in your own culture, where the main contradiction may be the cultural-Christian values and traditions of the Slavs.
Belonging to a pack is difficult to fight, and it is not necessary. It is important to understand where my pack really is and to separate it using boundaries or frames. For example: try to rearrange the phrase - “Our society is not so democratic to allow same-sex marriages” taking into account your interests - “Democracy is the will of the people and perhaps same-sex marriage is not so suitable for our society as to become part of our culture.”
For example, if you see a specialist speaking on TV about whom you have no information other than what is listed below during the speech, just think about his words. Would your opinion change if a neighbor or colleague said the same thing? If authority becomes “Captain Obvious,” then what is the point of his speech? Repeat with looking smart what you were saying 20 minutes ago with your co-workers on the way home? If you do hear something new, you should think about the benefits of the authority itself. Remember that he needs to earn your trust, no matter what he calls himself.
Should legality be accepted as the highest recognition? I think there will be a clear answer to this question in our state. I will only add my observation, which dispelled my personal myth about the state as a form of caring for people. I specifically chose a non-political example. When Poland joined the EU in 2009, public sector wages fell sharply compared to food prices. The news showed a report about a strike by border guards. It is quite understandable that people serving in military service cannot simply not go to work. They acted differently - they began to carry out all the procedures specified in the instructions. It would seem great! People are finally doing what is asked of them. The queues at the borders alone have grown 6 times. It turns out that she herself government system it is structured in such a way that it is impossible to follow it without breaking the law, leaving a narrow loophole for pardon or punishment at your own discretion.
I tried to describe the opposition to the Overton Window technology as state level, and personal, for everyone individual person. The whole point of this article fits into the concluding phrase of Joseph P. Overton, “But you personally must remain human. And a person is able to find a solution to any problem. And what one person cannot do, people united by a common idea will do.
