Among the participants in the Internet battalion, the phrase “Overton window” has become familiar and relatives over the past few years. Usually they talk about him as a terrible technology that allows you to turn something abnormal and socially dangerous into normal. Moreover, technology is scientifically based and without work working. We figured out if there is such a scientific theory as it is justified and whether there is evidence that it works.

“Overton window” is a phrase that is often found in the Russian segment of the Internet. Only in the media indexed by the Yandex.NOVSTS service, it Found 1800 times. And all this only after 2014.

In Runet, interest in the concept was caused by the appearance in 2014 in LJ post Evgenia Gorzeltsan entitled "Technology of destruction." The author told how the American sociologist Joseph Overton revealed the liberal "technology for changing the attitude of society to issues once fundamental for this society." It was Overton who “described how the ideas completely alien to society were raised from the garbage tank of social contempt, washed and, in the end, legislatively fixed.” Thus, there was a “legalization of homosexuality”, the legalization of pedophilia, incest and children's euthanasia, if not cannibalism, loom ahead. The post was replicated not only by Russian media and portals with a dubious reputation, but also by such a large tabloid as "Komsomolskaya Pravda". In addition, he appeared on the blog of Nikolai Starikov. The topic also seemed Interesting The authors of the portal "Orthodoxy.ru".

Explain the meaning of the concept approximately so. The society has a range of acceptable norms, which is supported by the assurances of politicians, intellectuals, laws. This spectrum is called the "window of political discourse." Attempts to change the boundaries of the “discourse window” are associated with a proposal to see reasonable in taboo and unacceptable. So the evil minority tries to legalize ideas, leading to negative consequences for the majority. “Look for who is beneficial and draw your conclusions,” the supporters of the “discourse windows”, often protruding from conservative positions, consistently notice. They notice that the concept is called the name of the author, an American scientist from the analytical center Mackinac Center for Public Policy, which means scientific and true.

But not only the conservatives took the theory into service. IN article Republic publications the author freed the “Overton window” from the “conservative” connotations already familiar to the reader and returned the concept of the seemingly inherent scientific status. In the text of the “political science” hypothesis of the “Overton window”, it made it possible to explain how “the usual framework for this society is permissible, normal can be expanded in a situation of crisis, threats.” An example was the successes of Russian propaganda to construct the image of the Kyiv Junta against the backdrop of “possible departure of Ukraine from the sphere of influence of Moscow”.

However, gradually notes appeared in a high -quality Russian -speaking press, casting doubt on the scientific status of the concept. In 2018, in the Opinion section of the same Republic appeared Investigation of the success history of “Overton Windows” in Runet from 2014 to 2017. In the same 2018, the "knife" edition presented Evidence of a conspiracy, not a political science of a concept. In search of an expert who will confirm or refute the scientific status of a concept, in 2019, students of Echo of Moscow They turned for clarifications To Catherine Shulman. She noticed that the concepts do not exist, she is mentioned only by Russian-speaking “conspiracy journalists and bloggers”, and the term is not found in English. And in general, it is impossible to impose a norm to society - this is the representations in society, and then public discussions begin. In 2020, Wonderzine website with reference to Schulman told, "As a political concept, it turned into a screen for conspiracyology."

But it should be noted that in English scientific texts the concept still appears-for example, in the chapter from a collective monograph Gender and Queer Perspectives on Brexitpublished by Palgrave Macmillan in 2019. In general, the history of the phrase “Overton window” with the status of a scientific concept Detective intrigue. Not the last place in it is occupied by the manipulation of experts of the analytical center Mackinac Center for Public Policy.

In the mid-1990s, the vice president of this analytical center Joseph Overton came up with a certain scheme. She explained at the level of common sense the value of the examination of analytical centers in working with public opinion. During the life of Overton, the scheme was not widely known. Yes, and he himself was not a scientist, but a libertarian -tuned analyst of a free market. In the scheme, he saw an abstraction that will replace boring ideas about the struggle of the left and right for the sympathy of the public. Behind it was not a systematization of empirical data, the methodology or criticism of previous hypotheses - elements, without which it is difficult to imagine scientific knowledge. After the death of Overton in 2003, his colleagues appropriated this idea, turned it into a kind of scientific concept and popularized in this form.

In 2006, the user of the Daily Kos platform made repost Records of the neoconservative publicist Joshua Trevinho left on the Swords Crossed blog (now unavailable). Trevinho, referring to Overton, described the “discourse window” as a method of creating political capabilities to approve the norms used by experts of analytical centers. Suppose Think Tank believe that some issues of public structure require a review-say, the attitude to home schooling in the state of Michigan. Homeschooling once was illegal, the idea of its legalization looked unthinkable. With the involvement of scientists, media, activists and lobbyists, the legalization of home education for citizens gained the status of a reasonable measure, and then the current norm. So any idea can be turned from unthinkable into a radical, acceptable, reasonable, standard and codified. Because all ideas exist in the context of the “windows of political discourse”: the divided by society fall into this “gap”, and the rest require a special “pushing” to be accepted.

After the “Overton window”, it increasingly appears in the American media. Following Trevigno, the authors sympathized with the temperate right. In 2007, The Atlantic editor Ross Doutat I noticedthat such games with public opinion are conducted not only by conservatives, but also by liberals, social democrats. At this stage, the “Overton window” is not discussed as a scientific or conspiracy theory. This is just an author’s scheme, as if convincingly showing the principles of the work of a political establishment.

In 2010, Joseph Leman, who headed the analytical center Mackinac Center for Public Policy, Offered The clarified and as if empirically more correct description of the model of the “windows of the political capabilities of an overton”. He insisted: the norms are moving not because politics want it. On the contrary, politicians choose the proposals supported by citizens. Typical political behavior is to remain within a familiar set of norms (the very “windows of political capabilities”). But citizens can just publicly - with the help of debate, attracting experts from analytical centers - raising loosening issues. And then their political representatives will not be able to ignore changes in public moods. Today, the experts of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, describing the Overton Window model, They say Directly: citizens, not politics - leaders of transformational processes in political life.

At this stage, the “Overton window” could remain a model of a description of an actively acting civil society. But the phrase appropriated by a popular American radio and TV presenter, conservative Glenn Bek. In 2010, Beck, known for the criticism of “progressive” and President Barack Obama, released Book, Fantastic thriller "Overton window." In it, the left-winged political technologists-prostorms manipulated public opinion for the justification of the occupation of America and abuse of the constitution. The novel reflected the mood of political movements like the “tea drinking movement” and became the quintessence of the conspiracy view of politics and social processes. According to the book, any observed changes in the social order is a consequence of the efforts specially conceived by the minority to destroy traditions and detachable.

Due to the specific image of Bek, the concept of the “Overton window” lost the charm of an apocryphal, but interesting scientific hypothesis. For the liberal public, the “Overton window” remained a political metaphor used by traditionalists and conspiralists. Much has changed the appearance of Donald Trump in the political arena. IN column For National Review, at the end of 2015, David French, who was a restrained conservative, in attempts to explain the popularity of the businessman, remembered the explanatory potential of the model. Here is Trump with his radical sentences: to ban the entry of Muslims in the United States, to build a wall with Mexico. They are contrary to recent political decisions, with an acceptable “discourse window”. But why are they unexpectedly supported by many in America? Everything is simple: the Americans are tired of the progressive political course and want to reconsider it in favor of more conservative values. Citizens move the “Overton window”, and Trump is the prophet of future transformations.

From close positions, the liberal -minded columnist of the British The Guardian, Susann Moore, performed. In 2016, she I noticedthat the polarization of British society (expressed in the wide support of Tori) means dissatisfaction with citizens with standard ideas. Public norms and agreements - the notorious “Overton window” - require a review. And this is not bad, because this is how you can build social democracy, attentive to the needs of not only levocentric life -lifers.

Over time, the “Overton window” appeared less and less in English -speaking journalism. The spectrum of conspiracy theories in the arsenal of conservatives has expanded since 2017 (see Qanon), and supporters of other ideological positions and so rarely resorted to the explanatory power of the concept. Sometimes in scientific articles the concept used To describe a conservative turn. In the end, by about 2018, it turned into meme.

That's the whole detective story. The vice-president of the analytical center, who did not claim the status of a scientist, came up with an abstract model to illustrate the importance of his own work. Populists conducted the operation of generalization: summarized the private observations of Overton and received a “scientific concept”. The concept transparently explained the device of a changeable political life. The simplicity of explanations allowed her to find an ideological coloring, to become in the early 2010s the instrument of conservatives and the basis for conspiracy theories. However, it does not contain verified information about the empirical world. Behind her, there was never a certain methodological optics or the data verified. It is impossible to verify, as well as falsify it, and it has nothing to do with scientific knowledge.