Wednesday, 26 October 2016

The Overton Window or how to be a publicity wizard?

Lies about the natural course of changes which happening in our society were denied by American sociologist Joseph Overton, who described technology that can change society's attitude towards the one of
the fundamental issues for our society.

According to Overton Window there are opportunities for each idea or problem in society, it's called the window of opportunity. Within this window, the idea may or may not be widely discussed and openly supported, trying to fix the law. 

Window moves, changing the fan of the features from the "unthinkable", that is completely foreign to public morality, totally rejected to the stage of "current policy", that is already widely discussed, adopted in the mass consciousness and enshrined in the law.

 Below I will walk through an example, step by step, how society begins to first discuss something unacceptable , then consider it appropriate, and ultimately resigned to the new law, fixing and protecting the once unthinkable.

Take for example something completely unimaginable. Suppose, cannibalism, the idea to legalize the right of citizens to eating each other. Hard enough example?

But obviously all that right now, in 2016, it is not possible to create propaganda of cannibalism - society will just go mad. This situation means that the issue of legalization of cannibalism is in the zero stage of the window of opportunities. This step, according to the theory of Overton called "Unthinkable." Now let's simulate how this "unthinkable" will be implemented and passed through the all stages of the window of opportunities. 


Again, Overton described technology that allows to legalize absolutely any idea.

Pay attention ! He is not suggesting a concept and he is not formulating his thoughts in some way - he describing the working technology. 

That is, a sequence of actions, the implementation of which invariably leads to the desired result. As a weapon to destroy the human communities such technology can be more effective than a nuclear

 The topic of cannibalism is still disgusting and absolutely not acceptable in society. Discussion of this topic in the press is nor desirable, nor, especially, in polite company. For now this is unthinkable, absurd phenomenon under the taboo. According to the theory, the first move of Overton Window - is to replace the subject of cannibalism from the “unthinkable” to the “radical” stages.

We've got freedom of speech.

Well, why not to talk about cannibalism ?

Scientists generally supposed to talk about everything - for scientists there are no taboo subjects, they should study everything. And if such a thing, let's collect ethnological symposium on the topic of "Exotic rituals of the tribes of Polynesia". Let's discuss the history of the subject, introduce it to the scientific revolution and get the fact of the authoritative statement about cannibalism.

See, it turns out, that the subject can be discussed and you will stay within the limits of scientific respectability.

The Window of Overton has moved. 

The revision of positions is already designated. Thereby ensuring the transition of topic from uncompromising negative attitude in society towards a more positive.

Simultaneously with the pseudo-scientific discussion necessarily will appear some "radical Society of cannibals". And let it be presented only on the Internet - radical cannibals will certainly be noticed and mentioned in all relevant media.
First of all, there is another fact of statements. And secondly, shocking scumbags of such a special genesis are needed to create an image of radical bogey. It will be "bad cannibals" as opposed to another bugbear - "fascists that are calling to burn everybody alike them". But we’ll talk about boogies later. To get started, simply publish stories about what British scientists and some radical freaks are thinking about eating human flesh.

The result of the first movement of Overton Window: the unacceptable topic put into circulation, the taboo is destroyed as well as uniqueness of the problem - greyscale were created. 


In the next step, window moves on and takes the theme of cannibalism from the field of radical realm to the possible.

At this stage, we’ll continue to quote "scientists". Why should we turn away from knowledge ?

About cannibalism. Anyone who refuses to discuss it, shall be branded as a bigot and a hypocrite.

Condemning bigotry, be sure to come up with an elegant name for the cannibalism.

So all sorts of fascists didn't dare to hang labels with the word with the letter "C" on every "alike".

Attention! Creating an euphemism - it's a very important point. To legalize unthinkable ideas we must replace their real names.

No more cannibalism.

Now it is called, for example,- anthropophagy. 

But this term will soon be replaced again, recognizing this definition offensive as well.
The purpose of inventing new names - to divert the problem from its designation, tear word from its content, to deprive their ideological opponents of the language.

 Cannibalism turns to anthropophagy, and then antropofiliya, just like a criminal changing names and passports.

In parallel with the game with the names occurs the creation of reference precedent - historical, mythological, contemporary or simply invented, but most importantly - legitimized. He will be found or coined as "proof" that antropofiliya actually can be legalized.

"Remember the legend of the self-sacrificing mother, gave her blood to drink to her children, dying from thirst ?"
"A history of ancient gods, eating everyone they meet - it was the completely normal in Roman Empire ! "

Well what about closest to us Christians ? They have no problems with antropofiliya at all ! They still ritually drink blood and eat the flesh of their god. Are you blaming the Christian church ? Who are you, damn you ? "

The main objective of this bacchanalia - is at least partially withdraw the people eating people out of a criminal prosecution. For once, at least to some historical moment.

Once legitimized precedent is granted, it is possible to move the Overton Window from the position of “feasible” to the “rational”.

This is the third stage. 

It will finish the split of a single problem.

"The desire to eat people is genetically laid in the human nature"

"Sometimes you must eat a human, there are compelling circumstances" 

"There are people who want to be eaten"
"Forbidden fruit is always sweet"
"A free man has the right to decide what he eats"

"Don’t hide information and let everyone understand who he is - antropofil or anthropophobe" 

 In the public mind is artificially created a "battlefield" for the problem. On the outer flanks scarecrows are placed - specially were appeared radical supporters and radical opponents of cannibalism.

They trying to pack with bogeys and write in radical haters their real opponents - that is, normal people who don’t want to be indifferent to the problem of legalizing cannibalism. The role of these bogeys is to actively create an image of mad
psychopaths - aggressive fascist haters of antropofiliya, calling to burn alive cannibals, Jews, Communists, and Black. 

Presence in the media provides everything needed.

In this scenario, antropofilys will remain as if in the middle between bogeys on the "territory of the mind", where with the pathos of "sanity and humanity" they will condemn "fascists of all stripes."

"Scientists" and journalists at this stage trying to prove that humanity throughout its history occasionally were eating each other, and that's fine. Now the antrophilya topic can be transferred from the “rational”, in the “popular” category. Overton Window moves on.

To popularize the theme of cannibalism we must support it with pop content matching with historical and mythological personalities, and if possible with modern stars. Antropofiliya freely penetrates in the news and talk-shows. People eaten in movies of wide distribution, in the lyrics and videos.

 One technique of popularization is called "Look at the sides !"

"Have you knew that a famous composer – was what ? ... An antropofil.""And one well- known Polish writer was a lifelong antropofil, he was even persecuted."

"And how many of them were sitting in the nuthouse ! How many millions of deported, were stripped of citizenship ! By the way, do you like a new Lady Gaga music video «Eat me, baby»?

At this stage theme is brought in the top and it starts to replicate autonomously in the media, show-business and politics.

Then, at the moment when everyone becomes bored and discussion the issues stalled, comes specially selected professional and says, "Lord, in fact everything not like this. And it's not like that, but it is like this. 

And we must do this and that" - and in the meantime he gives very specific direction, given by movement Window.

To justify the supporters of legalization being used humanizing of criminals through the creation of a positive image through not associated with crime characteristics.

"They are creative people. Well, he ate his wife, so what?"
"They truly love their victims. Eating, means love!"
"Antropofils have increased IQ and in everything else they adhere to strict morality" "There were raised like this," and etc.

This kind of phrases is the main point of popular talk shows.

"We will tell you a tragic love story ! He wanted to eat her! And she only wanted to be eaten ! Who are we to judge them ? Perhaps this is love? Who are you to stand on the way of love ?"

The fifth stage of movement of the Overton Window begins, when the topic is heated
to make possible to transfer it from the “popular” in the field of “contemporary politics” category.

Begins the preparation of the legislation. Lobby groups are consolidated in power and moving out of the shadows. 

Sociological polls being published, allegedly confirming a high percentage of supporters of the legalization of cannibalism. 

Politicians begin to roll trial balls of public statements on the topic of legislative consolidation. 

In the public consciousness introduced a new dogma - "prohibition of eating people is prohibited."


Described Overton Window of Opportunity moves easiest of all in a tolerant society. In a society that has no ideals, and, as a consequence, there is no clear division between good and evil.

You want to talk about how your mother is a prostitute ? Want to print this report in the journal ? Sing a song. Prove in the end that being a prostitute - is normal and even necessary ? Use the technique described above. It relies on permissiveness.

No taboos. 

Nothing is sacred.

Look around you.
Do we have a choice ? 

Evgeny Gorzhaltsan 

No comments:

Post a Comment