From Astrological Predictions to Sociological Fakes: How Propaganda Programs Society

Albert Speer, Minister of Armaments of Nazi Germany, left a striking testimony in his memoirs about the technologies of manipulating public consciousness:

"In those turbulent times, when everyone passionately sought grounds for hope, rumors fell on fertile soil. On the other hand, the population had long ceased to believe propaganda. True, there was one exception: in the last months of the war, an increasing number of desperate people sought solace in astrological forecasts printed in newspapers. As I learned in Nuremberg from the same Fritzsche, the propaganda ministry used them as an instrument of manipulating public opinion. Fake horoscopes prophesied dark valleys to be traversed, inevitable surprises, and happy deliverance from misfortunes. Only in astrological forecasts did the regime still have a future."

This testimony reveals a key truth: when traditional propaganda loses effectiveness, the regime doesn't surrender—it seeks new forms of influence. In the 1940s, it was astrology. In the 2020s, it's pseudo-sociology. The tools have changed, but the mechanism remains the same.

Ancient Technology in New Packaging

For millennia, power has invented ways to control mass consciousness without direct violence. The most effective tool turned out to be not weapons, but manipulation of the future. Court astrologers "predicted" exactly the future that was beneficial to the ruler: the people had to endure hardship, accept defeats as victories, sacrifice themselves for chimerical goals, love the tyrant and hate those the tyrant pointed to.

The mechanism was brilliant in its simplicity: a person who hears a "prediction" from an authoritative source unconsciously begins to adjust their behavior to this scenario. If a priest announced that the gods prophesied a great victory on the condition of the people's sacrifice—the people became sacrificial. If an astrologer predicted misfortune from enemies—society turned hostile. If a horoscope promised suffering that would inevitably lead to triumph—people endured and waited.

Today, stars have been replaced by statistical percentages, and astrologers by sociologists in expensive suits. But the technology of programming public consciousness has remained absolutely unchanged.

Sociology as a Weapon: From Science to Manipulation

In modern authoritarian regimes, "sociological research" performs the same function that astrological predictions once did in the palaces of pharaohs and kings. They don't measure public opinion—they create it. They don't record moods—they program them. They don't reflect reality—they construct the picture of the world desired by the authorities.

Let's take a recent example of manipulation: VTsIOM announces sensational poll results—"almost 70% of Russians are ready to economize and restrict themselves for the sake of defending the country," and 80% of citizens trust the Russian army. Impressive, isn't it?

Now let's look at the actual numbers from that same poll:

• Agree: 45%
• Rather agree: 24%
• Rather disagree: 10%
• Disagree: 14%
• Found it difficult to answer: 7%

See the trick? 45% + 24% = 69%, which transforms into the advertising slogan "almost 70%." But if we look honestly: only 45% actually agree, while 31% are either against or undecided. Where's this "almost 70%" ready for sacrifices?

Anatomy of Propaganda Lies: Five Levels of Manipulation

First Level: Manipulative Question

How exactly was the question worded? "Are you ready to economize for the sake of defending the country?" Try answering "no" to such a question during wartime in a totalitarian state. This is no longer neutral research—it's a loyalty test. The question is formulated so that the "correct" answer is obvious, and the "incorrect" one may arouse suspicion.

Second Level: Number Manipulation

Why were "rather agree" (24%) automatically equated with categorical "agree" (45%)? Why didn't they say that 31% either don't support or are hesitating? Because "45% support" sounds much less convincing than "almost 70% ready for sacrifices." Numbers don't lie—but you can lie with numbers.

Third Level: Headline as a Weapon

"Almost 70% ready to give everything to destroy Ukraine and agree to live in poverty"—such a headline creates an impression of monolithic support for the regime. In reality, the data shows a divided society where a significant portion is either against or unsure. But millions read the headline, while only a handful look at the numbers.

Fourth Level: Replication Through State Media

Fake results are disseminated through all controlled channels. Television, radio, newspapers, internet resources—all chorus in unison: "70% support!" Repetition transforms lies into "common knowledge." Now everyone who thinks differently feels like an isolated minority.

Fifth Level: Mass Self-Programming

The scariest part begins afterward. People who are afraid to stand out, who are used to thinking "like everyone else," who strive to be part of the group, begin to convince themselves: "If 70% think this way, maybe I should think this way too?" An internal capitulation to false reality occurs. The person voluntarily abandons their own opinion in favor of the mythical "majority opinion."

Social Proof Effect: When Lies Become Reality

The psychological mechanism on which this entire system is based is called "social proof" or "herd instinct." Humans are deeply social beings, and it's critically important for them to belong to a community, not to feel like outcasts. When they're constantly told that "70% think this way," they unconsciously begin to adjust their position, even if they feel internal discomfort.

This works particularly destructively in societies where:

• Freedom of speech is suppressed and there's no opportunity to hear alternative opinions
• There's real fear of repression for the "wrong" opinion
• There's no tradition of critical thinking and blind trust in "authorities"
• People are atomized, isolated and have no independent sources of information
• An atmosphere of distrust prevails where it's impossible to openly discuss controversial topics

Under such conditions, a fake "study" becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. People actually begin to think as they've been told they supposedly think. Twenty-first century astrology works flawlessly.

The Myth of the "Typical Russian Woman": Personifying the Lie

The propaganda machine doesn't stop at dry numbers. Entire narratives are built around fake data, literary characters are created. "Analytical" texts appear like:

"Data from RAS sociologists allow us to assert that key electoral groups fully share the value orientations broadcast by the government. Visualize the average Russian woman—a pensioner, a budget worker, a recipient of benefits, imagine her possible life experience, the life experience of her parents and loved ones, priorities, circle of interests, ideas about the surrounding world—and you'll see that the government is doing everything possible to uphold her interests."

Brilliant, isn't it? A collective image is created—the "Typical Russian Woman"—who supposedly sincerely supports the regime and its war. She doesn't exist in reality. She's a statistical chimera, a literary character. But she performs an important function: personifies the fake percentages, makes them "alive."

Now the regime can say: "It's not us who want war—it's her, the Typical Russian Woman, who demands it! We're only fulfilling the will of the people!" The crime of the authorities is shifted onto the shoulders of a mythical statistical entity created by propagandists.

Real pensioners, nurses, teachers—these are living people with different opinions, hopes, fears. But the regime doesn't need real people, it needs a convenient myth about the people. And sociological fakes create this myth.

The Double Benefit of the Kremlin Machine

For Putin's regime, these fake sociological "data" perform two critically important functions, killing two birds with one stone:

1. Internal Legitimization: Removing Responsibility

"Look, it's not us who want war—the people demand it! We're only responding to the will of the majority. We're even restraining popular anger!" The authorities remove responsibility for crimes from themselves, shifting it onto the mythical "will of the people." The opposition is demoralized: if truly 70% support the war, then what are we fighting against? Against the people?

2. External Pressure: False Narrative for the World

"We, the Kremlin, are ready for compromise, but you understand—our people demand the continuation of war. 70% won't allow us to retreat. We must take their opinion into account, we're a democratic country after all!" This creates a false narrative for the international audience—supposedly the Russian authorities are even more moderate than their own citizens and are trying to restrain the "enraged majority."

This is an exact copy of Nazi tactics. Goebbels used fake horoscopes to say: "It's not us who want the continuation of war—fate itself has decided so! The stars don't allow us to surrender!" Putin uses fake polls to say the same thing: "It's not us who want war—the people demand it!"

Albert Speer wrote: "Only in astrological forecasts did the regime still have a future." Today this can be paraphrased: "Only in fake sociological polls does Putin's regime still have legitimacy."

How to Recognize Manipulation: Survival Instructions

How to distinguish genuine research from propaganda fakes? Actually, it's simpler than it seems. Fakes give themselves away with a number of obvious signs:

Red Flags of Fake "Research":

• Too "beautiful," rounded numbers (68%, 73%, 84%, 92%)
• Manipulative question wording with an obvious "correct" answer
• Combining "agree" and "rather agree" categories into one group to inflate the percentage
• Complete ignoring or downplaying of the share of those who disagree and those who hesitate
• Client is the government or a structure controlled by it
• Results perfectly align with official propaganda
• Absence of methodology or its opacity
• No access to primary data for verification
• Headlines sensationally exaggerate actual results
• Impossibility of independent verification

Signs of Genuine Scientific Research:

• Nuanced, detailed results without simplification
• Neutral, balanced question wording
• Honest presentation of ALL answer categories, including those who disagree
• Detailed, open methodology with sample description
• Independent client not connected to the authorities
• Differences in opinions of different social groups
• Fully open primary data
• Possibility of verification and reproduction of results

Why Sociologists Become Accomplices to Crime

A logical question arises: how can professional sociologists, people with academic degrees, participate in this dirty game? Where is scientific ethics, where is conscience, where is basic honesty?

The answer is sad but simple: in a totalitarian system, independent science doesn't exist. There's only science that serves the authorities and science that's declared hostile. VTsIOM is a state structure funded from the budget. The "Levada Center" has been designated a "foreign agent" and operates under constant threat of closure. Sociologists have no choice: either you conduct "correct" polls with "correct" results, or you're an enemy of the state.

But even if we assume the data was collected more or less correctly, the very interpretation transforms science into propaganda:

• 45% "agree" magically becomes "almost 70% ready for sacrifices"
• Fear of repression is interpreted as "trust in the army"
• Absence of alternatives is transformed into "approval of policy"
• Silence from fear is presented as "support for the course"

Sociology transforms into astrology in white coats with academic degrees.

Resistance to 21st Century Astrology: What Everyone Can Do

How can society protect itself from this form of total consciousness manipulation? A recipe exists, and it's accessible to everyone:

1. Critical Media Literacy

Read not headlines, but actual data. Look at numbers, not their interpretation. The headline screams "70% support!"—find the original table and see what's really there. The ability to recognize manipulation should become a basic skill, like reading and writing.

2. Three Simple Questions

Before believing any poll, ask three simple questions:

• Who conducted the research? (State structure? Independent organization?)
• How exactly was the question worded? (Neutrally? Or with an obvious "correct" answer?)
• Where can full data be viewed? (Is there access to methodology and primary data?)

If there are no clear answers to these questions—what you have before you is not research, but manipulation.

3. Don't Be Afraid to Think Differently

"70% think this way" is not an argument, but an attempt to intimidate you and force you to capitulate. Once "99.9%" of Soviet citizens "unanimously" voted for the Communists. Where is that unanimity now? History proves: when a regime shouts loudest about popular support—it's actually already losing it.

4. Independent Information Sources

Access to diverse information sources destroys the monopoly on narrative. Seek alternative views, compare, analyze. Totalitarianism thrives in an information vacuum.

5. Public Discussion and Openness

Open expression of alternative opinions shows others they're not alone. When people see there are others who think differently—the spell of "70%" dissipates. Silence is dictatorship's ally.

6. Ridicule as a Weapon

Totalitarian propaganda is deathly afraid of mockery. When fake polls become objects of jokes and memes, they lose their hypnotic power. Laughter pierces propaganda's armor more effectively than any arguments.

7. Historical Memory

Remember: these technologies have been used before. From astrology to Soviet "99.9%" support, from Nazi horoscopes to Putin's sociologists—the mechanism is the same. History teaches: regimes that resort to such manipulations are doomed. It's only a question of time.

Conclusion: The Future Is Written Neither in Stars Nor in Percentages

Just as stars never actually dictated the will of peoples and the fate of empires, fake sociological polls don't reflect people's true aspirations and thoughts. They only try to create, construct, impose these aspirations. They program consciousness just as court astrologers programmed the behavior of subjects thousands of years ago.

But humans always retain choice—the most important choice that cannot be taken away by any repression: the choice between obedient acceptance of imposed reality and thinking that is independent, critical, free.

Repeat after state sociologists "70% ready for sacrifices for war" or ask: "Where did you get 70% when in the poll itself only 45% agree? Why are you manipulating numbers? Where's the full data?"

Astrology lost its power over minds in the Age of Enlightenment, when people learned to verify "predictions" with real facts and discovered that stars are silent. Propaganda "sociology" will lose its power when we learn to ask simple but lie-destroying questions:

• Who conducted the research and who paid for it?
• How exactly were the questions worded?
• Where's the full methodology and primary data?
• Can it be independently verified?
• Why doesn't the headline match the actual numbers?

Freedom doesn't begin with the overthrow of a tyrant. Freedom begins with refusing to believe those who try to tell you what you think. With refusing to capitulate to fake "70%." With understanding a simple truth: no one has the right to determine for you what you should think.

When the Nazi regime fell, Germans opened the archives and learned: all those optimistic horoscopes about inevitable victory were carefully orchestrated lies. When Putin's regime falls (and it will fall, as all dictatorships fall), Russians will open the archives and learn: all those "70% support" were equally carefully orchestrated lies.

The difference is only one: you're reading these lines now, today. You have a chance not to wait for the regime's collapse to see clearly. You have the opportunity to refuse participation in this madness today.

Don't believe fake stars. Don't believe fake percentages. Think for yourself.

In a free society, sociology serves to understand public opinion.
In a totalitarian one—to create it.

Albert Speer wrote about the last days of the Third Reich: "Only in astrological forecasts did the regime still have a future."
Today we can say: "Only in fake sociological polls does dictatorship still have legitimacy."

When a regime shouts loudest about popular support—it's actually already losing it.