Manipulators often step into the role of moralists—of “awake citizens” defending the “order of society,” “civilization,” “Christian values,” “traditions,” culture, “humaneness.” They declare themselves against “egoism,” “egocentrism,” “heartlessness,” “vulgarity,” and so on. They urge us to be “good,” to make sacrifices, not to think about money (while it is entirely possible that they themselves make money precisely from such appeals), and they try to instill feelings of guilt or shame in us.

They do this when they want something from us.

Every person (or almost every person) has some values and moral sensibilities—an inner sense of what is right, good, and decent. These sensibilities often become targets for manipulators, because what could be better for a manipulator than to make someone wholeheartedly devote themselves to a cause the manipulator has suggested, regardless of the damage and problems that such behavior may bring to that individual?

First and foremost, this type of manipulation is used, of course, in political propaganda. Every politician will justify their actions by claiming that they serve the common good and are in the interest of everyone—or at least of the overwhelming majority. But this is not always the case. All dictators, for example, have attempted to justify their atrocities with some notion of the “common good,” claiming that history would prove them right and demonstrate the necessity of their actions. I am not aware, however, of a single case in which this has actually happened.

“My spirit will rise from the grave and the world will see that I was right.”

These words are attributed to Adolf Hitler.

Naturally, we cannot overlook religious propaganda in all its sectarian forms. Historically, the Church has always been an instrument of control and continues to be one. By privatizing morality, the Church seeks to cultivate certain behavioral models among the population that serve the interests of elites. It is assumed that Christianity was introduced as the official religion of the Roman Empire largely because it encouraged patience and submission—qualities that served the cult of the Emperor and the unquestioning obedience he demanded. After its imposition in 313 AD by Emperor Constantine, however, the Church and Christians did not display tolerance toward other religions and beliefs, which were gradually eradicated, often with great violence.

Historically, church dogma and propaganda, with all their hypocrisy, have sought to suppress social discontent and to serve the power of the monarch. Today, the Christian Church is gradually losing the influence it once had, and current elites—while attempting to slow down or even reverse this process—are simultaneously searching for alternatives. They look for them in various places. Nationalism and national identity, being unifying factors based on tribal sentiment, are effective tools for mass control. Another direction is the presentation of certain behavioral models as morality, achieved through intrusive moralizing in the style of “how to be better people.”

An interesting technique is also the fabrication of new pseudo-religions, promoted among the population as various esoteric beliefs and pseudo-scientific theories—for example, the idea of the extraterrestrial origin of the human race, where the concept of God is replaced by extraterrestrials who created humanity and benevolently observe its development, waiting for it to mature spiritually and morally. There are also many esoteric teachings that, in fact, overlap with the church-Christian concept of God, sin, and punishment, despite differences in narrative and myth. Sin, of course, is subject to extensive tendentious interpretation, and punishment most often occurs in this world.

More often, however, “moral” claims against someone are not made from religious positions, but in the name of authorities such as the family, the community, society, the state, and so on. There are constant attempts to privatize morality and redefine it. Certain individuals and groups present themselves as representatives of the public interest, and from this pseudo-position they attempt to criticize and make demands. There are also frequent attempts to assign and “force” certain social roles onto individuals, after which they are condemned for not fitting properly into them.

Examples of manipulative phrases used in this type of manipulation include:

• “It’s not good to go against society!”
• “You must submit to the family!”
• “A parent should think more responsibly!”
• “Your interests are not above those of society!”
• “The state is above everything!”
• “You only think about yourself, not about people!”

We should always be cautious when someone calls upon us to behave “morally” and try to critically analyze such appeals. Is it truly a call for genuine moral behavior on a specific issue, or is it a vague and nebulous suggestion from which almost anything can be derived? We must be sure that it is not merely an instrumentalization of values, or even an attempt to impose behavior presented as a value, before we agree.

We should never forget that morality is not anyone’s patent or property. It is not religiosity or patriotism, nor a behavioral model—it is part of human nature itself, deeply innate within us, and it springs from our souls and our hearts.