Posted 4 июля 2022,, 12:07
Published 4 июля 2022,, 12:07
Modified 24 декабря 2022,, 22:37
Updated 24 декабря 2022,, 22:37
Another convincing example that the world is ruled not by scientific knowledge, but by myths, was given in his publication by the British scientist Valery Adzhiyev. It concerns the most, perhaps, the most sensitive sphere of human relations, the “friend or foe” opposition, from year to year, from century to century, generating xenophobia and fascism in all corners of the world, without exception, both in Britain and in the USA, including. Well, Russia in this sense, of course, is no exception, if we take into account the widespread lamentations that “the country was seized by Asians”, or the famous song of the Soviet era: “Jews, Jews, only Jews are around!”» Moreover, the media and social networks play almost the main role in distorting the real picture of the world and, accordingly, in strengthening the negative attitude towards “strangers”:
“An amazing sociology: how distorted British citizens imagine the country in which they live. And how does this relate to the "guilt of the West" in the current situation in the world.
To begin, I ask my friends and readers (especially British ones) to refrain from studying the attached picture and try to give instant answers to this question:
“What do you think is the share (as a percentage of the entire population of the country)
- ethnic/racial groups - whites, blacks, Asians and Jews? Muslims?
- gay lesbians, bisexuals and transgenders?
- taxpayers earning more than a million pounds a year? Over £100,000?”
Now take a look at the picture representing the results of a survey commissioned by The Campaign for Common Sense (CCS) by the leading sociological firm YouGov. It shows figures based on the estimates of citizens obtained during the survey, as well as real numbers based on the independent from the government (this official body is accountable to Parliament) The Office for National Statistics review "the Annual Population Survey (2020)".
The difference regarding the size of ethnic/racial and sexual minorities between real and imagined figures is not just large, it is colossal.
Think about it: people exaggerate the number of blacks in their country by 5.5 times, Muslims by almost four times, Asians by 2.4 times, and Jews by almost 20 times! But the share of the white population is greatly underestimated.
(Let me note in brackets that the number of immigrants from Russia is traditionally greatly - at times! - exaggerated - but this conversation is better to be postponed until the data of the last population census appears in the near future).
The difference between imaginary and real figures for sexual minorities is even greater. Even the share of vegetarians is exaggerated by five times!
These numbers mean that people have a highly distorted view of the country they live in. In particular, about ethnic and social minorities. Naturally, the question arises: how did such ideas form?
The answer is obvious: it is a reflection of the picture formed in the public information space. The result of the work of the media (especially television) and social networks. And the reflection of the dominant agenda in these same media and social networks. It is easy to see that this is the so-called. "modern" (aka - leftist, progressive) agenda, prevailing in the information space. Dictating to the public what is truly important. What is publicly discussed in a variety of contexts. The reflection of this importance is the very distortions in the perception of reality.
I'm sure many will say: it's good that such attention is paid to various kinds of minorities - because they deserve it. Perhaps they deserve (I myself belong to an ethnic minority and know the problems associated with this) - real equality in every conceivable aspect. But the creation of a distorted picture of the world cannot, in my opinion, be considered positive.
Of course, this situation with the perception of reality is not only in Britain. In the USA (from where the ideological wind blows) things are even worse. To quote a paragraph from an article in The Times:
- On average, respondents estimate that 41% of their compatriots are black, while the real figure is 12%. Even more surprisingly, black Americans believe that 52% of the country's population is also black. Respondents believe that the American population is 29% Asian (correct: 6%), 39% Hispanic (correct: 17%), and 27% Native American (correct: 1%).
In conclusion, I note that the figures related to the economy (more precisely, to taxation) are also impressive. Against the backdrop of constantly heard proposals from the left parties to solve the problem of filling the treasury by increasing taxes for the rich (who allegedly evade taxes), the distorted perceptions of citizens do not look so surprising. In real:
- 0.1% of the highest paid workers in the UK have an annual income in excess of £500,000;
- The average tax rate on employees in the top 1% is 42%;
- 1% of taxpayers with the highest income contribute about 30% of income tax revenues;
- The top 10% of taxpayers contribute more than 60% of income tax revenue.
But this is a slightly different topic.
So: personally, I think that the West really gave its opponents a reason to think that it is too weak to be capable of a proper rebuff. Because most of the bright minds in this very West are concerned about NOT THAT, and this is very visible from the outside. And these intellectually and technically advanced heads dictate exactly what to the Western world (its elites, its intellectuals, its governments, its media, its active citizens, finally) an agenda that is close to them NOT ABOUT THAT.
Not about what is really important in today's world, up to the survival of the Western liberal-democratic civilization. A world that, as it turns out, is not yet very adapted to the fact that the main questions would be those (like Can a woman have a penis? (eng: can a woman have a penis?) - there is simply nowhere to go from them), which formed people have a distorted picture of what is REALLY important.
So it turns out that we are able to win (ours and on our territory) in all these "cultural wars". But in a real war (where something immeasurably more is at stake and the enemy is not so convenient that it is enough to initiate a Twitter attack on his positions, which will then inevitably be joined by media, corporate, and even government structures - and hooray, victory has been achieved! ) - somehow not very much.