Click on a section to see the analysis
Because consciousness is an independent variable.
Consciousness is a social phenomenon
The West is the West. The East is the East
The cultural programs we live by were written by pharaohs
"It was better before, we need to return to the past"
"Yes, there are problems, but with others it will be worse"
Why we work with consciousness:
Simply because in the 21st century, consciousness is becoming the main battlefield.
Political raiders of the 21st century realized that big ideologies are no longer needed, the main thing is to choose myths correctly.
Consciousness was invisible
How did it become a key point?
It was considered derivative from the base. From being.
It was an incomplete being, a second-rate being.
They developed oratory, they developed rules of inference, they developed methods of proof and refutation, and at the same time they did not think that they were developing consciousness.
Values, ideals, symbols, meanings, attitudes were not subject to change.
Now it turns out that they are the key to everything.
1. Democracy: triumph and vulnerability
The creation of the USA as the first designed democratic state became a revolution in human history. In one century, this system turned into a global leader, proving its effectiveness. However, the paradox of democracy manifested itself immediately: its success gave rise to unprecedented resistance.
2. 200-year war against democracy
Since the 19th century, democracy has faced ideological opponents: - Big ideologies: communism, fascism, national socialism - all of them exploited consciousness manipulation as a tool of destruction. - Methods: - Lenin: the theory of "bringing consciousness" from outside - Stalin, Goebbels: total control over culture and information - Result: Hundreds of millions of victims and proof of the plasticity of mass consciousness.
3. The collapse of traditional defense mechanisms
20th century democracies relied on: - Economic dominance - Soft power (cultural influence) - Technological superiority
But these tools lost in the battle for consciousness.
Example: - The spread of fakes despite fact-checking - The growth of authoritarian sentiments in developed countries - Successful manipulations of the criminal international
4. Consciousness - the new battlefield
Why consciousness?
-Mistake of the past: it was believed that democratic values spread automatically. -Reality: Consciousness is not a "superstructure", but a base. It determines: - Perception of reality - Political choice - Resistance to manipulation - Example: Modern autocracies attack the West through: - Support for tribalism - Information wars - Export of anti-democratic narratives
5. Our approach: ontological defense
Traditional methods of struggle are exhausted. Solution - work with the deep layers of consciousness: 1. Deconstruction of myths - Destruction of narratives about the "strong hand", "golden past" 2. Cognitive immunity - Development of critical thinking 3. Emotional reboot - Overcoming fear and aggression - the main tools of authoritarianism
"Democracy can only survive if its defenders learn to wage a war of meanings at the same level as its destroyers do."
The most important thing to remember: ontological war is not a war with fakes. This is a war for universal structures of being.
Basic principles of consciousness ontology.
The ontology of consciousness is a representation of how consciousness is structured and what, accordingly, should be the principles of working with consciousness.
It is extremely important at the very beginning to fix the basic principle:
Consciousness is not a psychological phenomenon. And not a product of brain work.
And we cannot study public consciousness by studying the work of the brain or by studying the thinking of individual individuals.
Accordingly, it is impossible to change consciousness by affecting the mental processes of individual individuals, or by appealing to the reason of individual individuals.
Consciousness (both public and individual) is a social product.
It arises as a result of people's communication in the process of practical construction of society and exists in the form of a certain stable field, which a priori contains algorithms that program the behavior of individuals.
Consciousness algorithms are primary in relation to individuals and are assimilated by individuals in the process of socialization and in the process of enculturation.
Public consciousness can be described as a set of meanings, symbols, ideals, values, norms, practices, myths dominant in a given society.
Accordingly, it is possible to change consciousness only by changing the dominant myths, meanings and symbols in society, as well as by modifying cultural programs and building new spheres of culture.
From the theory of culture and from sociology we know that a myth is a construction that cannot be decomposed into rational components. Accordingly, it is impossible to change a myth with the help of rational criticism or rational arguments.
Thus, consciousness, which, as we see, is based mainly on mythology, is hermetic, impenetrable to rational arguments.
This is the main difficulty and low efficiency of the opposition's activities and the futility of all forms of educational efforts.
Metaphorically, consciousness can be represented as a kind of force field. The practice of changing CP proceeds from the fact that public consciousness is very complexly arranged.
It is not homogeneous either in content or in form. The conscious in it coexists with the unconscious, and the rational with the irrational.
And it is still unknown which layers are stronger.
In order to work with consciousness, in order to effectively change it, it is necessary: a) create an ontology of consciousness b) create a technology of consciousness transformation c) build a consciousness machine.
We see, looking back at the past, that there are two ways to manage your own life: let's conditionally call them the eastern way and the western way.
"The East is the East, the West is the West, and they will never meet."
Let's start with the East. Because approximately until the middle of the 1st millennium BC, the East was everywhere. Before the first point where we see democracy and from the point where we begin to study history, two and a half thousand years pass. The East was everywhere for two and a half thousand years. Now it is called the Global South. The eastern world is a world of merciless and hopeless despotisms. As stated in dictionaries: despotism is a form of government, a type of autocracy, in which supreme state power is concentrated in the hands of an absolute ruler or a narrow group of persons who have the right to freely dispose of the fate of their subjects, that is, in a despotism, an absolute monarch is not only the ruler of his state, but also the master of his subjects. In the East, human life is like a grain of sand in the desert, its price tends to zero. Like the ocean, which does not care about the waves playing on its surface and does not need them for its existence, the Asian state is indifferent, relentless, cruel. The individual for it does not exist; it ignores and suppresses him. This is a world of absolute unfreedom. The subjects of eastern despotisms knew that at any moment they could be deprived of everything they had and could be subjected to the most cruel and humiliating tortures and torments at any moment. S. Averintsev writes: "Even a close associate of the Persian sovereign had to prostrate himself before him (in case of disgrace, this close associate could be impaled). The prophet Isaiah, if we believe Jewish tradition, was sawn alive with a wooden saw. Such a punishment as crucifixion was applied in the Greco-Roman world to slaves and other disfranchised people, but in the Near East, the Hasmonean king Alexander Yannai could give hundreds of revered teachers of his people from among the Pharisees to be crucified. An eastern scribe, sage or prophet, an eastern nobleman, even an eastern king - they all knew well that their bodies were not guaranteed from any outrages, from any violence."
What kind of life management can we talk about in such conditions? None at all. You need to evade, hide, disguise, pretend to be submissive and obedient. If we take the situation of an eastern despotism, then the main opportunity for a person to protect his life and the lives of his loved ones is to come under the protection of a certain clan and observe its norms and principles, to live as the clan demands of you and observe all its instructions, whether you like them or not, or to become a super-rich person yourself and unite around you some forces, unite around you some resources that would be difficult to take away, in any case, the path dictated by the logic of despotism is, of course, unreliable, since the situation in a despotism can change at any moment, if you have put your life in dependence on a certain clan, then the fate of this clan can suddenly collapse down and crush the fruits of your labors. Of course, the clan gives very powerful, personalized protection, but at the same time you are completely dependent on this clan and you must already suppress your individual inclinations and completely become the property of the clan. And the second weakness is that the strength of the clan is not endless and sooner or later a period comes when the clan loses strength or when the favor of those in power suddenly changes to disgrace and then your life can quickly go downhill. In other words, in the East, a person is completely at the mercy of fate, at the mercy of irrational forces that he cannot control. All that remains is to pray and hope.
Why in ancient Greece everything turned out differently, we cannot know. In the sense, we cannot trace where such consciousness came from. The desire for subjectivity. And if we can, we cannot use such knowledge. Contrary to historical materialism, it is obvious that consciousness is not derived from anywhere. But we know that the Greeks said "fig you" and did not want to give their lives to anyone else's management. A Greek could not afford to entrust his life to a trust of someone else's uncle. He believed that it was his life, and the country in which he lives is his country, and he must participate in the life of the country, and he participated, on equal terms. And the Greeks invented the word "democracy" and considered it their duty to come to the city square, where public problems were regularly discussed. And those who did not come to the square and were unable to participate in the life of the polis were called in Greek "idiots". The Greeks said that it was wrong to depend on the arbitrariness of the authorities or to depend on the arbitrariness of the clan, they wanted to build something more stable, and they were looking for objective grounds on which to rely for managing the life of an individual and the life of the country. Objective grounds are such principles and establishments that do not depend on the changeable will of subjects, on the will of rulers or the crowd, do not depend on the whims of the crowd and do not depend on changes in the mood of the tyrant. The Greeks tried to find or create objective grounds, i.e. universal principles for all for building society and building human life, in which a person has solid guarantees for managing his own life. The Greeks believed that the grounds should be sought in the nature of things, believing that a person is part of nature and obeys its laws. The Greeks studied the nature of things and sought to understand the objective structure of the world and were sure that the foundations of human life should also be sought in nature, in the external world, because what can be, in the opinion of the Greeks, more stable and objective than matter, than an atom, than natural dependencies. Considering a person as part of nature, the Greeks were sure that by studying nature they would understand the essence of man and find the secret of the correct social structure. The Greeks wanted to manage their lives according to the laws of Logos, according to the laws of the cosmos, they thought that the laws by which the universe is governed, the cosmos and the laws by which humanity is governed are commensurate, commensurate. The Greeks looked for grounds in numbers, in the structure of atoms, in the apeiron, in ideas.
Universal structures of life
The Greeks were looking for universal structures of life, structures of being, because they understood that despotism is a structure of non-existence, a structure of death. Looking ahead, let's say that the Greeks failed to find such grounds that they dreamed of, partly therefore democracy in the Greek city-states did not live long. The Greeks did not know that the world is divided into two parts, the physical world and the symbolic world. And the laws of functioning of the physical world and the symbolic world do not coincide much. The Greeks did not manage to find objective grounds, but the very idea of searching for grounds turned out to be very fruitful and promising. As a result of incessant efforts, the Greeks had a huge list of inventions and discoveries, thanks to which the history of mankind received a huge impetus for development and which became the foundation of European civilization.
Content for cultural programs popup...
Content for the Golden Age myth popup...
Content for the stability myth popup...