History of the issue. Principles and Methods.
One thing is undoubted and important: the main role in our psyche (our mental apparatus, human psyche) is played by the subconscious, or the unconscious. This is where our thoughts, desires, actions, some aspirations are born, that from which the behavior of a person is subsequently formed. Individual behavior. The individual, as a particle, the smallest particle of that huge mechanism, which is called: mass. The crowd. Mass formation.
We can say that the methods of influencing the masses, the crowd, have been studied for a long time. Even in ancient times, principles were developed, some of which, either almost unchanged, have come down to us, or have undergone some transformation; despite the fact that part, as some researchers believe, was still irretrievably lost in the process of evolution. The ingenious minds of individual representatives of humanity excited and disturbed the mechanisms (the development of these mechanisms) of influencing the crowd. To the ground. On the subconscious of the masses. Equally successfully, these principles were either developed by scientists (Professor Z. Freud, for example, the founder of such a philosophical doctrine as psychoanalysis), or subconsciously guessed by practitioners who, by their example, demonstrated to us effective methods of crowd control. First of all, these are the great dictators Hitler and Stalin, famous politicians, preachers, and even famous writers and poets, who, for example, at the beginning of the 20th century (the period of the Silver Age) gathered crowds of enthusiastic admirers in the streets, and whose fame spread throughout the country. The country, we note, was still mostly backward and ignorant at that time. A country where electricity was not everywhere, and even more so, let alone such means of modern information technologies as television and the Internet (which appeared, however, much later). at the beginning of the 20th century (the period of the Silver Age) gathered crowds of enthusiastic admirers in the streets, and whose fame spread throughout the country. The country, we note, was still mostly backward and ignorant at that time. A country where electricity was not everywhere, and even more so, let alone such means of modern information technologies as television and the Internet (which appeared, however, much later). at the beginning of the 20th century (the period of the Silver Age) gathered crowds of enthusiastic admirers in the streets, and whose fame spread throughout the country. The country, we note, was still mostly backward and ignorant at that time. A country where electricity was not everywhere, and even more so, let alone such means of modern information technologies as television and the Internet (which appeared, however, much later). let alone such means of modern information technologies as television and the Internet (which appeared, however, much later). at the beginning of the 20th century (the period of the Silver Age) gathered crowds of enthusiastic admirers in the streets, and whose fame spread throughout the country. The country, we note, was still mostly backward and ignorant at that time. A country where electricity was not everywhere, and even more so, let alone such means of modern information technologies as television and the Internet (which appeared, however, much later). let alone such means of modern information technologies as television and the Internet (which appeared, however, much later). at the beginning of the 20th century (the period of the Silver Age) gathered crowds of enthusiastic admirers in the streets, and whose fame spread throughout the country. The country, we note, was still mostly backward and ignorant at that time. A country where electricity was not everywhere,
And, nevertheless, the masses easily obeyed those individuals who were able to understand and form the laws of mass formation.
What are these basic principles?
Well, first of all, it is the effect of the subordination of one's “I” - “I” to the collective. Here is how Le Bain wrote about it: "... the individual experiences a feeling of irresistible power, which allows him to indulge in the primary urges, which he, being alone, would have to curb." (1).
That is, in other words, when a person is in a crowd, in a mass, he can be “himself”. He can give free rein to all his ancient natural instincts. Everything that I have to hide while living in modern society. In a cultured society. But culture really leaves an invisible imprint on the behavior of the individual. If in our souls each of us would be quite happy to be guided by such principles of the life of an ancient person as to kill, eat, and rape, in a modern society, with existing and developed rules and laws of a civilized society, he (an individual) should already learn to clothe his instincts (which, of course, have not disappeared anywhere, and have survived unchanged to this day) into the appropriate framework. For example, a civilized person seemed to be unable to eat another person. Although here we can remember that during the existence of the GULAG, there was a widespread habit of taking the “third” to escape. This "third" was taken exclusively as food, sustenance. But this is an anachronism these days. Remaining, however, in our unconscious. For example, when we love a person very much, we want to enjoy him completely, without a trace. Eat it. Until now, expressions such as “my sweet”, “my sweet” are still found - these are nothing more than instincts that cannot find satisfaction in modern society, since they are introduced by modern culture to the rank of lawlessness. (Although there are still occasionally come across stories about modern maniacs-cannibals who seem to live among us. But such people by their marginal behavior are elevated to the rank of renegades, and in every possible way are rejected and punished by modern society. Although, again,
The second principle of mass formation is the so-called infectiousness effect. Here is how Le Bon describes it: “Contagion is an easily stated, but inexplicable phenomenon, which should be ranked as a hypnotic phenomenon ... In a crowd, every action, every feeling is contagious. And, moreover, to such a great extent that the individual very easily sacrifices his personal interest in favor of the interests of the common. "(2).
This, as you understand, is also understandable. And in almost the same way, understanding (and explaining) this fact rests on culture. In the development and existence of civilization. Indeed, with the development of society, this very society leaves an imprint on an individual (on each) individual in the form of the existence of certain norms and prohibitions. Society develops its own laws (the laws of the existence of an individual in the civilized world), and to go beyond these laws means to be subjected to a certain punishment. And in the crowd, each individual is, as it were, impersonal. If you do something that is contrary to the norms of generally accepted morality, you will be condemned by other individuals, because what you do will be, first of all, “noticeable”. And other individuals, as it were, will try on what you have done in accordance with the systems of culturally significant values existing in society (which they would like to violate themselves with pleasure, but they cannot decide to do so, because they know that they will be punished for it). And here some separate individual does an act that clearly contradicts what is permissible to do, being within the framework of a single society, society. This act, as it were, goes beyond the framework of a socially permissible act, the individual, as it were, opposes himself to the crowd, which means that the crowd will certainly punish this individual for this. Even for the fact that he allowed himself to do something that is forbidden to her. What is prohibited by the laws introduced once. In the end, the crowd And here some separate individual does an act that clearly contradicts what is permissible to do, being within the framework of a single society, society. This act, as it were, goes beyond the framework of a socially permissible act, the individual, as it were, opposes himself to the crowd, which means that the crowd will certainly punish this individual for this. Even for the fact that he allowed himself to do something that is forbidden to her. What is prohibited by the laws introduced once. In the end, the crowd And here some separate individual does an act that clearly contradicts what is permissible to do, being within the framework of a single society, society. This act, as it were, goes beyond the framework of a socially permissible act, the individual, as it were, opposes himself to the crowd, which means that the crowd will certainly punish this individual for this. Even for the fact that he allowed himself to do something that is forbidden to her. What is prohibited by the laws introduced once. In the end, the crowd What is prohibited by the laws introduced once. In the end, the crowd What is prohibited by the laws introduced once. In the end, the crowdpunishing the individual, as if thereby subjugatinghim to yourself. He speaks with his repressive methods what he can and cannot do. In a situation where an individual is in this very crowd, and when another individual almost immediately repeats the act committed by the first, the crowd seems to see that, in general, nothing is happening. So why not do the same thing that someone just did in fact with them; all the more, seeing that other members of the given mass formation, it seems, is not punished. As a result, as if hypnotized by the act of the first (which in the soul would dream of doing each of the crowd), the individuals gathered in a mass - perform the same action. And, often, they do it with some kind of manic pleasure. It's much easier in a crowd. It is easier to organize pogroms, riots, arson, massacres and rapes. For this, as it were, no one will condemn. After all, there is no culprit in this case. Everyone is guilty. And that means no one. And already because what is possible in a huge crowd, in mass, is almost impossible alone. Moreover, each individual, as it were, feels behind him the power (tremendous power) of the crowd. There are known cases of mass heroism during the war, when crowds of virtually unarmed people rushed up to attack tanks with a cry of "hurray". Or an example of the recent pogroms on the streets of France, when in the dark, crowds of thugs smashed shops and set parked cars on fire. In a crowd, the individual is impersonal. But, as it were, it becomes infected by the action of another, thereby submitting to the magnetism of the crowd. Moreover, each individual, as it were, feels behind him the power (tremendous power) of the crowd. There are known cases of mass heroism during the war, when crowds of virtually unarmed people rushed up to attack tanks with a cry of "hurray". Or an example of the recent pogroms on the streets of France, when in the dark, crowds of thugs smashed shops and set parked cars on fire. In a crowd, the individual is impersonal. But, as it were, it becomes infected by the action of another, thereby submitting to the magnetism of the crowd. Moreover, each individual, as it were, feels behind him the power (tremendous power) of the crowd. There are known cases of mass heroism during the war, when crowds of virtually unarmed people rushed up to attack tanks with a cry of "hurray". Or an example of the recent pogroms on the streets of France, when in the dark, crowds of thugs smashed shops and set parked cars on fire. In a crowd, the individual is impersonal. But, as it were, it becomes infected by the action of another, thereby submitting to the magnetism of the crowd.
And from here we can single out the third quality - suggestibility. “The most careful observations have shown, - wrote Le Bon a century ago, (3) - that an individual who is in the bosom of the active mass for some time soon falls due to radiation emanating from it ... into a special state very close to "Enchantment" that takes possession of the hypnotized under the influence of the hypnotist ... The conscious personality is completely lost, the will and ability to discriminate are absent, all feelings and thoughts are oriented in the direction indicated by the hypnotist. This, approximately, is the state of an individual belonging to the psychological mass. He is no longer aware of his actions ... Under the influence of suggestion, he in an irresistible impulse will begin to perform certain actions. And this frenzy among the masses is even more insurmountable than that of the hypnotized,
So that's it. The once separately existing individual now obeys any action of another individual, because we inspire them. “Individual members of this milieu almost every minute infect each other,” writes Bekhterev, (4), “and depending on the quality of the infection they receive, they are agitated by lofty and noble aspirations or, conversely, low and animalistic. More can be said. It is unlikely that any act that goes beyond the ordinary happens at all, hardly any crime is committed without the direct or indirect influence of outsiders, which most often acts like a suggestion. Many people think that a person commits this or that crime solely for strictly balanced logical reasons; and meanwhile, the closest analysis of the actions and deeds of the criminal often reveals to us that,
We can see an example of this in the auditorium, when specially bribed “spectators” at the right moment either laugh or clap their hands, as if “forcing others” to follow their example. And those follow. And there is applause. And indeed it is. Just as someone can “throw” the “first stone” in the crowd, and the others (inspired, hypnotized by this example) take up the initiative, and, you see, the glass, in which building is no longer left, and then the same building is taken by attack (the storming of the White House during the Moscow events of the early 90s, for example).
“The same power of suggestion explains the heroic deeds and selflessness of the troops under the influence of one exciting word of their beloved commander, when, it seemed, there was no longer any hope of success,” Bekhterev notes, (5). “It is obvious that the power of suggestion in these cases takes superiority over conviction and the consciousness of the impossibility of achieving the goal and leads to results that could not have been foreseen or expected in a minute. Thus, the power of suggestion takes precedence over conviction and will and leads to events that the will and consciousness of duty would not be able to accomplish. But unlike the latter, suggestion is a blind force, devoid of those moral principles that govern the will and the consciousness of duty. That is why, by means of suggestion, the masses of the people can be guided as to great historical exploits, and the most cruel and even immoral acts. That is why organized crowds, as you know, often manifest their activities far from being in accordance with the goals for which they were formed. It is enough that someone arouses base instincts in the crowd, and the crowd, united by lofty goals, becomes in the full sense of the word a beast, the cruelty of which can surpass all likelihood. Sometimes one thrown word, one thought or even one wave of the hand is enough for the crowd to break out reflectively with the most brutal atrocity, before which all the horrors of the robbers pale in color. " united due to lofty goals, it becomes in the full sense of the word a beast, the cruelty of which can surpass all likelihood. Sometimes one thrown word, one thought or even one wave of the hand is enough for the crowd to break out reflectively with the most brutal atrocity, before which all the horrors of the robbers pale in color. " united due to lofty goals, it becomes in the full sense of the word a beast, the cruelty of which can surpass all likelihood. Sometimes one thrown word, one thought or even one wave of the hand is enough for the crowd to break out reflectively with the most brutal atrocity, before which all the horrors of the robbers pale in color. "
The crowd is suggestible, infectious, subordinated to the desire for depersonalization, the disappearance of the individual, personal "I", submission and attachment of this "I" - to the collective "I". “The mass is impulsive, changeable and excitable,” wrote Freud, (6). - It is almost exclusively guided by the unconscious. The impulses to which the crowd obeys can be, depending on the circumstances, noble and cruel, heroic or cowardly ... (the crowd) cannot stand the delay between desire and the fulfillment of what it wants. She feels omnipotent, the concept of the impossible disappears from the mass of the individual.
The mass is gullible and extremely easily influenced, it is uncritical, the implausible does not exist for it. She thinks in images ... The feelings of the masses are always very simple and very hyperbolic. She ... knows no doubt or uncertainty.
The masses immediately go to extremes, the expressed suspicion immediately turns ... into ... confidence, a grain of antipathy - into wild hatred.
... the one who wants to influence her does not need a logical check of his argumentation, he should paint in the brightest colors, exaggerate and always repeat the same thing.
... she respects strength ... from her hero she demands strength, even violence ...
... the mass falls under the truly magical power of words ... ".
And this is really so. It may even, unfortunately, be so. All this, as it were, testifies to the fact that in most cases the crowd will be controlled not just by a leader, but by a fanatic. Wasn't Hitler such a fanatic, who managed to subjugate the multimillion people of the Germans to his power, and forced them to participate in a world adventure? Aren't Lenin and Stalin such fanatics? Moreover, both Hitler and Stalin fully used the methods of intimidating the crowd. They both used the concentration camp system invented by Lenin. Stalin, who was feared by millions and adored by millions, created the greatest apparatus of intimidation and repression in history - the NKVD and the GULAG. The Germans were ready to pray to Hitler, who also used the internal police (Gestapo) to intimidate his own people. These dictators fully used the principles of Le Bon and Freud (most likely about these principles, either not guessing, or coming to them on their own). The principles of subjugation of the masses. But these principles were used with no less success before them (and, as we have already noted, including to the psychiatrists themselves Freud and Le Bon), and are used with no less success to this day. The only difference is that in the modern world, modern technologies make it possible to do this much more efficiently by influencing a larger number of individuals, all the same (still) forcing them to fulfill the will of one person, the will of the leader ... and are used with no less success to this day. The only difference is that in the modern world, modern technologies make it possible to do this much more efficiently by influencing a larger number of individuals, all the same (still) forcing them to fulfill the will of one person, the will of the leader. and are used with no less success to this day. The only difference is that in the modern world, modern technologies make it possible to do this much more efficiently by influencing a larger number of individuals, all the same (still) forcing them to fulfill the will of one person, the will of the leader ...
Part 2. Modern means of influencing the subconscious - with the aim of subordinating (controlling) the masses.
The means and methods of influencing the subconscious are significantly different, used, for example, a hundred years ago, and modern ones. With the massive proliferation of television, the Internet, and print media, this has become much easier to do. In particular, we are talking about a large coverage of the territory. That is to say, the impact on the mass consciousness in much larger volumes.
For example, it is known that after 20-25 minutes of watching a TV program, the brain already begins to absorb any information that comes through the TV broadcast. Let us recall one of the principles of managing (manipulating) the masses, the crowd: suggestion. The action of TV advertising is based on this principle. For example, we are shown some kind of commercial. Suppose, at first, we have a clear rejection of the material shown to us with our ideas about this product. We look, listen, perhaps, justifying ourselves by the fact that we will not buy anything of the kind. This is how we calm ourselves down. In fact, the psyche of the individual is subject to the general laws of control of the human psyche. And if for a long time any signal gets into our information field, then all this is inevitably deposited in the subconscious. So, if in the future there will be a choice between which product to buy, we will unconsciously give preference to the one about which we have already “heard something”. Moreover. It is he who will evoke in our memory some kind of positive associative array. As something familiar, if not even "close" to us. Let's remember how often we have heard advertisements for popular brands (the fact that they have become “popular” is due to advertising). As a result, this not only does not cause any rejection in us, but also when we are faced with the choice of a product about which we do not know anything, and, on the other hand, a product that is something familiar to us, we subconsciously (and, as it were regardless of ourselves, our consciousness - which is understandable given the fact that all our actions or desires are controlled by the subconscious) instinctively we will reach for this particular product. Moreover, depending on the specifics of the psyche of a particular individual, such an effect (so that this product becomes "close" to him) can occur over several years. Here the principle of time is just important, the principle of duration of exposure.
It is also imperative to pay attention to the fact that the real manipulation of the mass consciousness (more precisely, we are now talking about its greater efficiency) is possible when a person is constantly under the influence of some information. Indeed, in this case, he no longer has to think. Everything is "thought out" for him. And at the same time, in this case, the result is achieved due to the fact that a person is forming, as it were, a new ideology. For this, of course, it is more desirable to take the individual out of the context of his previous life. Because it is much more difficult to control a person's consciousness if he is in an environment familiar to him. For example, if an individual is isolated from society for a long time by placing him in some new conditions (for example, an army, a prison, an orphanage, a boarding school ...), then in this case we can talk about the success of the impact on his psyche, with the aim of subordinating it. All of the above, the so-called. disciplinary spaces. Where there are well-established norms and rules of behavior. (And the behavior of a beginner is to quickly "feel" the observance of these rules). There is a fairly widespread saying: do not go into a strange monastery with your charter. That is, the individual is already, as it were, phylogenetically ready to subordinate his life to new rules of behavior. A new system of values is being formed for him. The former way of life, once peculiar to him, is forgotten. After a while, a person becomes, as it were, ready to obey. To become what they want to see him, and not what he really is. And, in fact, after a long stay in a new place for myself, the individual no longer really knows what he really is. After all, he now obeys completely different rules. Once new to him. But now they have become "close and dear".
Of course, the psyche initially resists this. A person who is abruptly pulled out of the usual world of habitation (for example, after being drafted into the army, or an unexpected arrest, and especially when the “case” is fabricated. And the person does not even physically have time to psychologically prepare), at first, there is a rejection and a sharp rejection of the new habitat. Everything inside him, as it were, revolts against it. But then the withdrawal process takes place. He is morally depressed, which means that he is unconsciously ready to accept the conditions in which he found himself.
No less important for the success of this is the "specificity" of the new habitat, for example, a new language, or rather the appearance of neologisms in its usual language, or, more precisely, jargon - that is, a specific language inherent in a particular community.
Jargon is quite common in the criminal environment. Or in the same army. Anyway, any professional community has its own specific differences in speech, expressed in the presence of a special kind of words that are understandable to those who, by chance, should be with them. For example, in addition to criminals, there is the jargon of sailors, jargon of athletes, jargon of workers. A person, being in this environment, seems to subconsciously learn a new language for himself faster, striving to quickly be accepted into a new environment, which means that he stops being a beginner, which is very painful for most people, and at least they experience psychological discomfort. ...
Further, when a person enters a new environment for himself, not only a reorientation of life values occurs, but also, as it were, new parental figures appear. If earlier for the majority of individuals these were parents, older brothers, educators (if they were brought up in an orphanage), older comrades (if someone lived on the street), now the head of the colony ("owner", as he is called in criminal jargon), or the same sergeant (if we are talking about recruits in the army). After all, now it is happening so that you can not independently decide when you need to sleep or eat. Your new "parent" will tell you about it. He, (on occasion), will punish you in the same way. And you already unconsciously begin to obey him. And if you don't obey, they will force you, “break” you. Moreover, Will "break" almost everyone.
It is equally important for the success of manipulation, and a change in value systems, the emergence of new values.
It is as if you are forced to abandon the past, offering in return a new world. As an example, it is enough to pay attention to religious sects (where the above methods of management and manipulation are strictly observed), or to recall the outstanding (in terms of manipulation) example of the establishment of Soviet power. Ulyanov-Lenin and his associates fully used all the principles of manipulating mass consciousness. Moreover, this, as you know, was not only an experiment, but one of the most famous successful experiments in history. And analyzing that period of history, we can safely consider all the applied principles of the psychology of influence as an outstanding and at the same time tragic example of manipulation of mass consciousness. But, unfortunately, this is our psyche. And it is subject to general laws and rules of behavior,
Speaking about modern means of mass influence on the audience, we, most likely, should talk about some combination of advertising and mass media (QMS). It is no secret that advertising largely replaces the true (internal) values of a person, replacing them with those imposed on him. Acting on the subconscious of an individual, advertising leads to the fact that a person no longer seems to belong to himself. He obeys the principles and norms of life imposed on him. And even if he consciously still resists some of them, subconsciously he already makes a choice in favor of one or another psychological setting. Almost here, by the way, is the formation of an inferiority complex in certain groups of the population who are unable to buy this or that product. A product that matches a particular lifestyle. (Perhaps this is why a certain part of the population is ready for any kind of enrichment, in realizing their desire to step on the next rung of the social ladder. These are the roots of crime and prostitution. After all, money, in this way, is achieved in an easy way. Here you can also talk about those who are hooked by scammers. A person subconsciously experiences discomfort because of his "poverty". Therefore, when he is offered to quickly enrich himself, he seems to be unconsciously drawn to this. Therefore, we can say that all the activities of fraudsters are, as it were, unconsciously sanctioned by the state, which instills in its fellow citizens the myth that it is bad to be poor). Here you can also talk about those who are hooked by scammers. A person subconsciously experiences discomfort because of his "poverty". Therefore, when he is offered to quickly enrich himself, he seems to be unconsciously drawn to this. Therefore, we can say that all the activities of fraudsters are, as it were, unconsciously sanctioned by the state, which instills in its fellow citizens the myth that it is bad to be poor). Here you can also talk about those who are hooked by scammers. A person subconsciously experiences discomfort because of his "poverty". Therefore, when he is offered to quickly enrich himself, he seems to be unconsciously drawn to this. Therefore, we can say that all the activities of fraudsters are, as it were, unconsciously sanctioned by the state, which instills in its fellow citizens the myth that it is bad to be poor).
The principle of the so-called. fragmentation of information, used in order to increase the suggestibility of the audience. For example, if we consider the front page of a major newspaper or the first minutes of a news block of TV programs, we will notice that initially we are presented with a sort of "squeeze" (main events) of what will be told. Thus, the audience is already, as it were, prepared.
The fragmentary distribution of information in different bands is aimed at ensuring that the individual from the very beginning is not able to combine them and understand the problem. In this case (as if "to the heap"; that is, to deprive the information of the main meaning), the technique of sensationalism is used.
For example, rapidly changing plots in the news lead to the fact that a person is simply physically unable to single out for himself the main points of the material received, and to make any critical analysis of it. The individual's attention is, as it were, scattered. This reduces the level of psychological protection and criticality in a person, which means that the suggestibility threshold sharply increases. As a result, advertizing on time, as it were, contributes to the penetration immediately into the subconscious. And let a person who has experienced this form of influence on himself does not immediately run to buy this or that product, or vote for this or that party, or a deputy. But we can be sure: when the need for this comes up, a person will be guided by exactly what is already in his subconscious. After all, it is our unconscious that is "guilty" of the commission of any actions,
What is in our subconscious? Everything that we have ever heard or seen. Apart from the so-called. phylogenetic memory (or collective unconscious), we can say that everything that once passed before the individual is practically unchanged (with minor exceptions when a number of psycho-defenses are turned on, such as repression, etc.) is deposited in our subconscious.
Otherwise, as they say, it is not given.
Let's list the basic principles of manipulation (impact on masses) ..
It is suggestion, contagion, and imitation. There are also six principles of manipulation.
Let's list them.
The principle of consistency. Being consistent is the natural desire of any person. Being consistent in your views means being a respected person. This is what the principle of manipulation is designed for, when, by forcing a person to first make sure of his responsibilities (for example, fill out the contract form himself, or write a poem about how good a company is, or a great product), thereby “guaranteed” gets “new client". It is very important for a person to feel consistent. And if he took the first step, he will almost certainly take the second.
The principle of authority. If with any request not just some person (all the more, unknown to us) turns to us, but endowed with some signs of distinction and public recognition (for example, an academician, general, governor - appealing to you personally), the majority cases you can say that you will follow his request. This is the principle of authority.
The principle of benevolence is not far from here. It is easier for us to believe an outwardly attractive (even beautiful) person than one who has any external defect.
If a beautiful actress or fashion model asks us for something, this is a much greater guarantee that we will respond to her request than to the request of some homeless person, or a drunkard lying in the mud. We will give our hand faster to the slipping Sharon Stone (for women - choose any male actor) than to a dirty, ragged, and half-drunk beggar. This happens, as it were, independently of our consciousness, unconsciously.
Another of the principles is the principle of mutual exchange. Or "the rule of appreciation." This principle is widely used in large supermarkets, when we are offered to try a product for free, thereby unconsciously forcing us (as gratitude) in the future (or immediately) to buy this very product.
The principle of contagion. If a large number of people buy a product, we seem to unconsciously strive to do the same. Here is the origin and popularity of various ratings, paid claps in the auditorium during performances of pop and show business figures, etc. Everywhere in such cases, the individual, as it were, initially and unconsciously focuses on the mass behavior of other people.
And finally, another principle is the principle of scarcity. It is based on the fact that a person starts buying something if this thing can be lost, or vice versa, it is profitable to acquire. The risk of losing something directly affects our subconscious mind, forcing us to make often unnecessary purchases. In Soviet times, many things were considered a deficit, including books, for example. Many people remember the time when it was necessary to hand over a couple of tens of kilograms of waste paper for the required book, or to face the choice of purchasing this book only from speculators-resellers. And this despite the fact that the books were published in millions of copies. Now, when you can find almost any edition in the store (and the books themselves are on free sale), book circulation rarely exceeds 5 thousand copies. Paradox? No. After all, many then bought books "just like that", only due to the fact that there was an opportunity to "get it." Now this is no longer necessary.
And be that as it may, all this just clearly demonstrates the principle of scarcity, the principle of manipulating our consciousness. Consciousness of the masses. And most of us, unfortunately, succumb to these manipulations.
1, 2, 3. G. Le Bon. Psychology of peoples and masses. VAPP library.
4, 5. VMBekhterev. Suggestion and crowd.
6. Freud Z. Psychology of the masses and the analysis of the human self // Freud Z. Psychoanalytic studies. - Minsk: Potpourri, 2003. - p. 428-430.
List of used literature.
1. Freud Z. Psychology of the masses and the analysis of the human self // Freud Z. Psychoanalytic studies.— Mn .: Potpourri, 2003.— p. 422-480.
2.1. Freud Z. The future of one illusion // Freud Z. Psychoanalytic studies.— Minsk: Potpourri, 2003.— p. 481-525.
3. Freud. Dissatisfaction with culture. VAPP library. www.vapp.ru
4. Freud Z. Introduction to psychoanalysis. - SPb .: ABC-Classics, 2003 .-- 480 p.
5. Freud Z. Totem and taboo // Freud Z. Wit and its relation to the unconscious; Fear; Totem and Taboo: Collection. - Minsk: Potpourri, 1998. - p. 324-491.
6. Freud Z. Psychoanalytic etudes // Freud Z. Psychoanalytic etudes. - Minsk: Potpourri, 2003. - p. 525-566.
7. Freud Z. Three essays on the theory of sexuality // Freud Z. Psychology of the unconscious.— SPb .: Peter, 2002.— p. 113-180.
8. Freud Z. Basic principles of psychoanalysis.- M .; Kiev, 1998.
9. Freud Z. Some remarks on the concepts of the unconscious in psychoanalysis // Sigmund Freud, psychoanalysis and Russian thought. - M., 1994. - p. 29-34.
10. Freud Z. Resistance against psychoanalysis // Freud Z. Psychoanalytic studies.— Minsk, 1997.— p. 525-535.
11.G. Le Bon. Psychology of peoples and masses. - Model, St. Petersburg, 1995.
12. VM Bekhterev. Suggestion and crowd.
13. SG Kara-Murza. Consciousness manipulation.
Author: Sergey Zelinsky
www.sergeizelinsky.rf
