Neo-Obscurantism is an extremely widespread cultural phenomenon characterized by blind acritical acceptance of notions, models and narratives provided by mainstream mass media (television, newspapers, etc...), and by an irrational instinctive rejection of any idea and/or information that contradicts them, coupled with strong hostility against anyone who proposes such ideas/informations.
work in progress...
The belief that conspirations do not exist
Religion disguised as science
Fascism disguised as liberalism
Individuals affected by neo-obscurantism most of the time act and behave in an almost indistinguishable way from a normal person; the symptoms start to manifest the moment the subject encounters an information that contradicts the mainstream version; some subjects react with hysterical outbursts of fear and/or rage and/or hilarity, some other by falling into an unresponsive dazed state, as if not able to elaborate what has been said.
The neo-obscurantist personality is almost always recognizeable by the following symptoms:
At the roots of Neo-Obscurantism lie well-known and widely recognized psychological mechanisms:
The tendence of the human mind to reason on the basis of words/symbols rather than ideas/concepts.
The tendence of the human mind to focus its conscious attention towards what's explicitly stated, rather than implicitly asserted.
The need to feel protected by an omnipotent and infinitely good parent figure.
The fear of being rejected by the rest of society for being different and/or disobeying.
The fear of losing one's own reference points and entire worldview.
The tendence of the human mind to base the majority of its judgement about something by the first impression.
The tendence of the human mind to focus on what's constantly reinforced and lose sight of what's not.
All these mechanisms are actively exploited by mainstream media to indoctrinate people through a wide array of psychological tactics:
Repeatedly associating two different concepts in order to "train" people to think those concepts are equivalent. / Repeatedly contrasting two different concepts in order to "train" people to think those concepts are antithetic.
Changing the meaning of a word in order to manipulate people to promote things that go against their own ideals or interests.
Arbitrarily including/excluding particular cases into the scope of a definition in order to keep the mainstream narrative intact.
Trying to make something look good by referring to it with good-sounding terms. / Trying to make something look bad by referring to it with bad-sounding terms.
Damaging the reputation of opponents in order to prevent people from agreeing or supporting them ./ Cleaning the reputation of your allies in order to push people to agree and support them.
Using someone's good reputation or visibility to promote harmful ideas in order to push people to agree with them. / Using someone's bad reputation and visibility to promote good ideas in order to prevent people from agreeing with them.
Tying dissenters to recessive political sides in order to slander them as "extremists" or otherwise ethically questionable people.
Representing dissenters and their ideas in a caricatural way in order to turn them into laughstocks and prevent people from discussing them seriously.
Blackwash dissenting arguments by coming up with blatantly fallacious ones which superficially resemble them.
Depriving dissenters from the chance of accusing you by accusing them first.
Mixing truths and falsehoods by distributing them among two opposing ideological factions in order to promote infighting and prevent dialogue and cooperation.
In times of a big ideological paradigm shift, manufacturing new ideologies/narratives from the elements of the previous ones, redistributing them in such a way to keep the good elements and bad ones mixed together.
Focusing attention on an undeniable truth in order to fallaciously use it as a justification for a wrong proposal.
Hiding the doctrinal nature of mainstream ideologies by avoiding labeling them, and making up labels for their skeptics instead.
Only mentioning informations that suit the mainstream narrative while hiding anything that doesn't.
Intentionally creating and spreading a fake or blatantly flawed statement in support of a dissenting view and, once it gained wide popularity, debunk it in order to destroy the whole subject's credibility.
Avoiding people's resistence against a governative/corporate agenda by slowly implementing it through a series of small individual steps.
Proposing an extreme measure that's sure to cause general backlash, then backpedaling by changing it to a milder version in order to make it seem reasonable by comparison.
Disseminating a narrative through any possible medium and in any possible aspect of life, in order to make sure it is constantly reinforced into in the minds of people and accepted as natural.
Subtly promoting a narrative in an "invisible" way by hiding implicit references through the lines of other unrelated subjects.
Pretending overconfidence in order to give weak-minded audience the impression that the proposed thesis is so undeniable that no one in their right mind would ever doubt it.
Reacting in an astonished, almost offended way to dissenting views in order to give weak-minded audience the impression that they should feel ashamed for even considering them.
Depicting dissenters and their ideas as somehow "dangerous", in order to push people to hate them and discriminate against them.
Taunting opponents and driving them into having a desperate reaction for first, so they'll put themselves to shame with their own hands.
Manufacturing a fake opposition in order to compete against the real one.
The spread of neo-obscurantism is extremely dangerous due to its power to render affected people completely submissive to autority and, by consequence, easily manipulable by propagandists and political agitators for socially deleterious purposes, including but not limited to:
(work in progress...)