Why staying within set manufactured parameters of cultural and sociopolitical conversation goes against your best interests... and what you can do about it
I love this in concept, but I’m finding the reality of unregulated, no gatekeepers discourse creates a cacophony of extremely loud and purposefully ignorant and disruptive voices sucking up a lion’s share of the air in the room. Loud, angry (or faux-angry) voices are definitely provocative and exciting, but if they become the norm they become irritating background noise we tune out. I find hope in the democratization of information flow inherent in youtube and substack and other constantly emerging platforms. I never would have heard half the radical free thinkers I love - even when I don’t agree with them - without these platforms. The Tom McDonalds and Rens and AOCs and so many more voices that don’t speak from my experience, yet move and provoke me. This brings me hope.
Humans naturally followed a window of what is good and bad to talk about, even way back in tribes.
The current shit show is horrible, but at least it helps people realize that their "tribe" is a bit crazy and abusive.
It's like being in a dysfunctional family where at some point family members finally realize that it's ok to speak out. After that, they have to face the enablers who unconsciously gaslight the free thinker for thinking outside the box. We are seeing them in society that ignore the key issues and go along with their party and the economic system.
Until they see this dysfunction, the Overton window remains and functions like side blinders for race horses, giving them tunnel vision.
Glad I took the time to read this entire article (likely a couple combined). I’ve also written about every similar concepts, what I call the “digital ghetto”. This is an important message and you’re doing humanity a service here.
As for a new model, I’ve never found a better one than that provided by the CTMU. Have you heard of this before?
I went over that exact issue here. It's a very old psyop that was instituted during the aftermath of the JFK assassination to reel in anyone who questioned the official narrative through ridicule and the threat of ostracism....
A wonder-full piece. Take it from someone with no college education, someone who describes his four-year high school career as the best eight days of his life: even someone like me, someone with no Overton-approved credentials whatsoever can be just as misleading as any Ivy-League graduate.
Elite credentialed protectionism is precisely why the scoundrels on Wall Street, the scoundrels in Washington DC, and the scoundrels in academia are all the same scoundrels at different stages of their careers. I call it conspiracy by fiat, and it's what happens when the top jobs in government, industry, and academia become interchangeable and incestuous components of single ambitious careers. Conspiracy by fiat is inevitable when generations of brilliant students from the same Ivy League business and law schools are all taught to think the same way about the same things by tenured professors who likewise all think the same way about the same things. It’s what happens when those same students graduate with virtually identical ambitions of power and success. Old-fashioned conspiracy by design is hardly necessary when conspiracy by fiat not only satisfies the same ends, but offers plausible deniability to everyone and accountability to no one. The ultimate lack of accountability in the long tail of credentialism means those with power are simply no longer required to explain it. All of the narratives that once fit inside the Overton Window have failed. All that remains is the brute exercise of raw power.
Thank you so much! I agree - if we are all taught to think the same way, and no one ever questions it, how likely are we to ever think or do anything differently? It's built in. Luckily, many of us are questioning how we were taught to think and act. And hopefully, over time, that number will grow and we'll be able to make a difference. 🙏🏻💜💫
Fantastic piece! You touch on so many critical points when it comes to discussion, dialectics and steering the public towards narratives. I really enjoyed how you tied in credentialism with only allowing certain institutions that are puffed up through the school system to control the dialectic. It really does boil down to (and you systemically explain this very well) managing dialectics. Additionally, when people hear the word "fringe" it really is a spell played upon the public; for that image is already placed in the mind of land that is not explored, nor should it be. With most people devoid of the Trivium way of thinking, they don't have the mindset to go out to the fringe and apply the Trivium method to even see if there is truth. I also loved your bits of humor spread throughout, like "Me listening to both sides of the argument."
Very nice. I don't have as much faith in the idea of citizen journalism based on new technologies as I used to because as you point out that can be easily faked and used to serve the interests of those who are in power.
That said what you say about a fake and engineered opposition is 1000% correct.
Rewarding read, thank you for sharing! Instinctively, as a teenager, I never felt compelled to vote. My intuition led me to understand that it is controlled.
However, I have become aware that without the darkness, we cannot see and appreciate the light.
I believe that we can and should shift our perspective while removing ourselves from the "so called" left wing/right wing of the same bird. We learn to become grateful for what the darkness showed us and begin to see that light and truth comes from within us.
We need not search for truth outside of ourselves. We are ultimately seeking to know ourselves and who we are at a soul level. Know the truth and the truth (only you) can set you free.
Be the light and the change you wish to see in the world 🕊️
Everyone naturally likes being with like minded friends and communities, and that entails conformity within the group and often hostility towards ideas or opinions associated with the "other." Your essay describes it well, including its presence among dissidents. If you like "x" you must be a "y" and like all "y"s, you must hate "z." Thousands of Overton windows, large and small, scattered across the spectrum, overlapping like Venn diagrams, and most of them firing shots at each other.
I'm in a strange place. I sample ideas and information from every opinion camp without ever finding a tribe to fully join. I play with ideas and compare them, keeping whatever I find of value and discarding the rest without any great hostility. I know quite a bit about a lot of things, and many of my interests and viewpoints seem contradictory (even "fighting words") to others. It's pretty easy for me to find some common ground with almost anyone, and I even tend to dress and act in a way that's both conventional and eclectic. I have plenty of friends, but I'm always at risk of offending them if they got a good look at my book collection and browsing history. It's a good thing I enjoy my own company.
Substacks like this seem to be communities for people who sample and explore other communities. But do we also have our own tribal Overton window?
Thank you so much! Yes, I think some of us have taken to cobbling our own windows together out of bubble gum, common sense, nuance, and chutzpah. Probably a fair assertion! :)
Yeah, you nailed it in your essay. It's human nature, isn't it? We all have our comfort zones and need the companionship of others who share our experiences and views. Most of those cobbled-together windows aren't much of a problem, as they're always under construction. I know my little window is. Also, communities accustomed to being alienated by the mainstream can often accept other alienated groups- "agree to disagree"on a few points and the rest is okay. We can all learn a few things from each other too.
The infiltration by controlled opposition is the problem, exactly as you said. It exploits the natural human weakness to reduce community bonds to uniform wearing, identity politics and narrow definitions.
We're in an era of societal collapse. It's part of the cycles. All we can do is do our best and prepare for what's to come. And make friends and smell the roses along the way.
I agree. If we are disallowed from choosing our view points a la carte, we can see that what we're being fed is a box full of prepackaged talking points. If we are discouraged from opening that up to other frames, there is absolutely an attempt at discourse control underway. Those who still think a la carte and have maintained forming their own original perspectives are more apt to see it for the point/counterpoint paradigm that it is. Those who are used to picking up the prepackaged box either tend not to be aware that there is another way or doing things or have chosen the box that most closely matches their overall agenda. We're in a sad state.
Not only beautifully said but also solution-oriented. I love this piece and appreciate your time and effort to write & share it. ❤️
You gotta know the Overton Window is a broken concept when there are more than one of them! I can’t count how many times I’ve encountered a communication breakdown (back in the day when I’d entertain such convos ;) when I and a friend found ourselves using different definitions for “left” and “right”! For example, I was taught that fascism/collectivism is “left” and anarchy/self-governance is on the right but that is not what is propagated through mainstream narratives.
And that very communication breakdown between two once-connected souls is the indication that the stupid “Overton window mind prison” is working and doing what it was designed to do.
Excellent! Thank you . You really expressed what we all need to hear & recognize. I personally believe that the “acceptable discourse,” is being controlled by the banks and “elite,” along with a well run, long term campaign or sci-op, which has resulted in creating fear, tunnel vision, along with that need to step back into conformity by going along with the acceptable side(a). Those in control, who know their agenda, create the acceptable discourse to meet their needs, as they model and mold the desired behavior for the population. Violence is even allowed and acceptable when done by the “correct” groups. That helps the illusion that we are able to express ourselves. We fail to observe that those who engage in the “correct” violence or “protest” are not arrested and the incidents quickly disappear from the media.
The modeled behavior directed by those really in charge, is often quite different from their personal behavior and the opposite of the world they are creating for themselves. Their far beyond “privileged” values are not meant for anyone else.
We may participate in what we believe to be an intelligent, well thought out, intellectual disagreements with each other, as long the subject remains within the boundaries defined by the various forms of media. Anything truly controversial, especially if it contains truth is quickly silenced.
As you mentioned, it becomes a risk in this society to think and act outside these created boundaries. True freedom of speech is an illusion , as those who are brave enough to actually question , observe, research and then state their questions, observations and conclusions publicly , quickly find that they are loosing those “close friends,” then reputations, jobs, family members, and safety, etc., as they become labeled, threatened, and , in effect, banished.
I love your ideas and potential methods of creating change. This will need to be strategized with many brave individuals being willing to meet and create alternative supports, services and communities. I’m in.
Again, thanks so much for these brilliant observations.
Well said. And I find I am careful what I say as challenging someone’s paradigm is often not welcome. It can be dangerous physically and financially to speak out. Or simply tiring when people are not ready and simply desire to create energy arguing or complaining in a certain frequency bandwidth. Hopefully decentralized platforms of communication like NOSTR will become more mainstream and less focused on developer conversations. I like what you say about creating alternative options. Also not easy. And change can happen unexpectedly.
I love this in concept, but I’m finding the reality of unregulated, no gatekeepers discourse creates a cacophony of extremely loud and purposefully ignorant and disruptive voices sucking up a lion’s share of the air in the room. Loud, angry (or faux-angry) voices are definitely provocative and exciting, but if they become the norm they become irritating background noise we tune out. I find hope in the democratization of information flow inherent in youtube and substack and other constantly emerging platforms. I never would have heard half the radical free thinkers I love - even when I don’t agree with them - without these platforms. The Tom McDonalds and Rens and AOCs and so many more voices that don’t speak from my experience, yet move and provoke me. This brings me hope.
Ask and you shall receive.
Humans naturally followed a window of what is good and bad to talk about, even way back in tribes.
The current shit show is horrible, but at least it helps people realize that their "tribe" is a bit crazy and abusive.
It's like being in a dysfunctional family where at some point family members finally realize that it's ok to speak out. After that, they have to face the enablers who unconsciously gaslight the free thinker for thinking outside the box. We are seeing them in society that ignore the key issues and go along with their party and the economic system.
Until they see this dysfunction, the Overton window remains and functions like side blinders for race horses, giving them tunnel vision.
Glad I took the time to read this entire article (likely a couple combined). I’ve also written about every similar concepts, what I call the “digital ghetto”. This is an important message and you’re doing humanity a service here.
As for a new model, I’ve never found a better one than that provided by the CTMU. Have you heard of this before?
Thank you. I'm honored.
No, I haven't. I'd love to see it. Thanks!
Well done Demi. Having access to your posts raises my expectations for humanity. Thank you.
Why are some people so quick to label as "Conspiracy Theories" any idea that doesn't align with the mainstream ( & totally fraudulent ) concepts.
I went over that exact issue here. It's a very old psyop that was instituted during the aftermath of the JFK assassination to reel in anyone who questioned the official narrative through ridicule and the threat of ostracism....
https://www.starfirecodes.com/p/this-would-never-happen-now
Thanks, very informative, I had almost forgotten the history here.
Thanks! Glad you found it useful! 🙏🏻💜💫
A wonder-full piece. Take it from someone with no college education, someone who describes his four-year high school career as the best eight days of his life: even someone like me, someone with no Overton-approved credentials whatsoever can be just as misleading as any Ivy-League graduate.
Elite credentialed protectionism is precisely why the scoundrels on Wall Street, the scoundrels in Washington DC, and the scoundrels in academia are all the same scoundrels at different stages of their careers. I call it conspiracy by fiat, and it's what happens when the top jobs in government, industry, and academia become interchangeable and incestuous components of single ambitious careers. Conspiracy by fiat is inevitable when generations of brilliant students from the same Ivy League business and law schools are all taught to think the same way about the same things by tenured professors who likewise all think the same way about the same things. It’s what happens when those same students graduate with virtually identical ambitions of power and success. Old-fashioned conspiracy by design is hardly necessary when conspiracy by fiat not only satisfies the same ends, but offers plausible deniability to everyone and accountability to no one. The ultimate lack of accountability in the long tail of credentialism means those with power are simply no longer required to explain it. All of the narratives that once fit inside the Overton Window have failed. All that remains is the brute exercise of raw power.
Thank you so much! I agree - if we are all taught to think the same way, and no one ever questions it, how likely are we to ever think or do anything differently? It's built in. Luckily, many of us are questioning how we were taught to think and act. And hopefully, over time, that number will grow and we'll be able to make a difference. 🙏🏻💜💫
Yes, the diversity of everything except thought we live with now is one of the better arguments for abolishing the Department of Education.
The Department of Indoctrination? Sure. Why not? 🤣
Fantastic piece! You touch on so many critical points when it comes to discussion, dialectics and steering the public towards narratives. I really enjoyed how you tied in credentialism with only allowing certain institutions that are puffed up through the school system to control the dialectic. It really does boil down to (and you systemically explain this very well) managing dialectics. Additionally, when people hear the word "fringe" it really is a spell played upon the public; for that image is already placed in the mind of land that is not explored, nor should it be. With most people devoid of the Trivium way of thinking, they don't have the mindset to go out to the fringe and apply the Trivium method to even see if there is truth. I also loved your bits of humor spread throughout, like "Me listening to both sides of the argument."
Thank you so much! I appreciate it!
Oh yeah, two more things I forgot to mention. Loved the chart and the solutions.
Thank you!
Very nice. I don't have as much faith in the idea of citizen journalism based on new technologies as I used to because as you point out that can be easily faked and used to serve the interests of those who are in power.
That said what you say about a fake and engineered opposition is 1000% correct.
Thank you. I appreciate it!
Rewarding read, thank you for sharing! Instinctively, as a teenager, I never felt compelled to vote. My intuition led me to understand that it is controlled.
However, I have become aware that without the darkness, we cannot see and appreciate the light.
I believe that we can and should shift our perspective while removing ourselves from the "so called" left wing/right wing of the same bird. We learn to become grateful for what the darkness showed us and begin to see that light and truth comes from within us.
We need not search for truth outside of ourselves. We are ultimately seeking to know ourselves and who we are at a soul level. Know the truth and the truth (only you) can set you free.
Be the light and the change you wish to see in the world 🕊️
Blessing to all, namaste 🙏
I love this essay !
Everyone naturally likes being with like minded friends and communities, and that entails conformity within the group and often hostility towards ideas or opinions associated with the "other." Your essay describes it well, including its presence among dissidents. If you like "x" you must be a "y" and like all "y"s, you must hate "z." Thousands of Overton windows, large and small, scattered across the spectrum, overlapping like Venn diagrams, and most of them firing shots at each other.
I'm in a strange place. I sample ideas and information from every opinion camp without ever finding a tribe to fully join. I play with ideas and compare them, keeping whatever I find of value and discarding the rest without any great hostility. I know quite a bit about a lot of things, and many of my interests and viewpoints seem contradictory (even "fighting words") to others. It's pretty easy for me to find some common ground with almost anyone, and I even tend to dress and act in a way that's both conventional and eclectic. I have plenty of friends, but I'm always at risk of offending them if they got a good look at my book collection and browsing history. It's a good thing I enjoy my own company.
Substacks like this seem to be communities for people who sample and explore other communities. But do we also have our own tribal Overton window?
Thank you so much! Yes, I think some of us have taken to cobbling our own windows together out of bubble gum, common sense, nuance, and chutzpah. Probably a fair assertion! :)
Yeah, you nailed it in your essay. It's human nature, isn't it? We all have our comfort zones and need the companionship of others who share our experiences and views. Most of those cobbled-together windows aren't much of a problem, as they're always under construction. I know my little window is. Also, communities accustomed to being alienated by the mainstream can often accept other alienated groups- "agree to disagree"on a few points and the rest is okay. We can all learn a few things from each other too.
The infiltration by controlled opposition is the problem, exactly as you said. It exploits the natural human weakness to reduce community bonds to uniform wearing, identity politics and narrow definitions.
We're in an era of societal collapse. It's part of the cycles. All we can do is do our best and prepare for what's to come. And make friends and smell the roses along the way.
.
I agree. If we are disallowed from choosing our view points a la carte, we can see that what we're being fed is a box full of prepackaged talking points. If we are discouraged from opening that up to other frames, there is absolutely an attempt at discourse control underway. Those who still think a la carte and have maintained forming their own original perspectives are more apt to see it for the point/counterpoint paradigm that it is. Those who are used to picking up the prepackaged box either tend not to be aware that there is another way or doing things or have chosen the box that most closely matches their overall agenda. We're in a sad state.
I guess we're "a la carte" thinkers! Thanks for giving it a sophisticated French name. I feel more refined already !
LMFAO!
I like the buffet with the fresh, interesting ideas and information where all the cool kids are. Like right here.
It's located very, very far away from the creepy evil psycho stuff that erupts out of hell, offering shit sandwiches.
Bravo, Demi!! 🙌🙌
Not only beautifully said but also solution-oriented. I love this piece and appreciate your time and effort to write & share it. ❤️
You gotta know the Overton Window is a broken concept when there are more than one of them! I can’t count how many times I’ve encountered a communication breakdown (back in the day when I’d entertain such convos ;) when I and a friend found ourselves using different definitions for “left” and “right”! For example, I was taught that fascism/collectivism is “left” and anarchy/self-governance is on the right but that is not what is propagated through mainstream narratives.
And that very communication breakdown between two once-connected souls is the indication that the stupid “Overton window mind prison” is working and doing what it was designed to do.
Excellent! Thank you . You really expressed what we all need to hear & recognize. I personally believe that the “acceptable discourse,” is being controlled by the banks and “elite,” along with a well run, long term campaign or sci-op, which has resulted in creating fear, tunnel vision, along with that need to step back into conformity by going along with the acceptable side(a). Those in control, who know their agenda, create the acceptable discourse to meet their needs, as they model and mold the desired behavior for the population. Violence is even allowed and acceptable when done by the “correct” groups. That helps the illusion that we are able to express ourselves. We fail to observe that those who engage in the “correct” violence or “protest” are not arrested and the incidents quickly disappear from the media.
The modeled behavior directed by those really in charge, is often quite different from their personal behavior and the opposite of the world they are creating for themselves. Their far beyond “privileged” values are not meant for anyone else.
We may participate in what we believe to be an intelligent, well thought out, intellectual disagreements with each other, as long the subject remains within the boundaries defined by the various forms of media. Anything truly controversial, especially if it contains truth is quickly silenced.
As you mentioned, it becomes a risk in this society to think and act outside these created boundaries. True freedom of speech is an illusion , as those who are brave enough to actually question , observe, research and then state their questions, observations and conclusions publicly , quickly find that they are loosing those “close friends,” then reputations, jobs, family members, and safety, etc., as they become labeled, threatened, and , in effect, banished.
I love your ideas and potential methods of creating change. This will need to be strategized with many brave individuals being willing to meet and create alternative supports, services and communities. I’m in.
Again, thanks so much for these brilliant observations.
Well said. And I find I am careful what I say as challenging someone’s paradigm is often not welcome. It can be dangerous physically and financially to speak out. Or simply tiring when people are not ready and simply desire to create energy arguing or complaining in a certain frequency bandwidth. Hopefully decentralized platforms of communication like NOSTR will become more mainstream and less focused on developer conversations. I like what you say about creating alternative options. Also not easy. And change can happen unexpectedly.
Brilliant. Iv recognized the arguing from the same side of the coin but didn’t know anything about the Overton factor. Very very helpful!
Thank you!