It was 2014, and I was standing in the ruins of Donetsk airport, when a Russian-backed rebel commander launched into what seemed like an oddly academic lecture. Between bursts of artillery fire, he explained an American political science concept: the Overton Window – a theory that describes the range of policies and ideas a society considers acceptable at any given time. Politicians can’t successfully propose anything outside this “window” of acceptability without risking their careers. “The West uses this window,” he said, smoke from his cigarette blowing into my face, “to destroy our traditional values by telling us it’s okay for me to marry a man and for you to marry a woman. But we won’t let them.”
The encounter was jarring not just for its surreal nature – a discussion of political theory amid artillery fire – but for what it revealed about Russian propaganda’s evolving sophistication. When I researched the Overton Window after our conversation, I discovered that Russian state media had long been obsessed with the concept, transforming this Western analytical framework into something more potent: both an explanation for social change and supposed proof of Western cultural warfare. Russian commentators didn’t just cite the theory – they wielded it as both explanation and evidence of Western attempts to undermine Russian society.
Over the next decade, I watched this once-academic term slide from Russian state TV screens and the trenches of eastern Ukraine into mainstream Western discourse – embraced by commentators on both the far left and far right of the political spectrum. What began as a framework for understanding social change became a blueprint for engineering it.
Now we’re watching this process play out in real time. For instance, Elon Musk’s handpicked team running DOGE – the new Department of Government Efficiency – are inexperienced young men between the ages of 19 and 24 with unfettered access to federal systems. A decade ago, putting Silicon Valley twenty-somethings in charge of critical government functions would have sparked outrage. Today, it’s celebrated as innovation.
What began as a framework for understanding social change became a blueprint for engineering it.
The transformation extends far beyond Washington. When America’s president proposes to “take over” Gaza and turn it into “the Riviera of the Middle East,” when Musk tells Germans to “move beyond” Nazi guilt, they’re deliberately expanding what’s politically possible. From Joe Rogan to Tucker Carlson, from African opinion writers praising Trump’s aid cuts as “liberation” to conservative thinkers reimagining solutions for Gaza – each pushes the boundaries of acceptable discourse a little further.
The shift manifests across every domain of power. Inside federal agencies, tech executives now make decisions once reserved for career civil servants, normalizing private control of public functions. On the global stage, raw deal-making has replaced diplomatic principles, with decades-old alliances discarded in favor of transactional relationships. El Salvador’s president offers his prisons to house American inmates. Ukraine, fighting for survival against Russia, signals its willingness to trade military support for mineral rights. Even humanitarian aid, long seen as a moral imperative, is being recast as a form of dependency that needs to be eliminated.
BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, has already adapted to this new reality. Their latest analysis simply divides nations into “winners and losers” based on their ability to navigate this new transactional diplomacy and stay on Trump’s good side. No moral judgments, no democratic values – just raw negotiating power.
The Overton Window – or “Окно Овертона блядь” as the Russian commander put it in 2014, mechanically adding the profanity at the end of each phrase like a full stop – offers a powerful framework for understanding how societies transform – not through sudden upheaval but through the gradual shifting of what people consider acceptable. Whether through the brutal recalibrations of war or the calculated provocations of political theater, the Overton Window is always in motion, reshaped by those willing to push its boundaries.
This systematic normalization of the extreme is a core tenet of the authoritarian playbook – a calculated strategy of gradually expanding what society will tolerate, inch by inch, controversy by controversy. The goal is not just to push boundaries, but to exhaust resistance, to make the previously unimaginable seem not just possible, but inevitable.
The same mechanism operates in political discourse, where deliberate provocation becomes a strategic tool for reshaping collective perception. Donald Trump is the master of this approach.
Whether through the brutal recalibrations of war or the calculated provocations of political theater, the Overton Window is always in motion, reshaped by those willing to push its boundaries. This systematic normalization of the extreme is a core tenet of the authoritarian playbook.
His political methodology isn’t about achieving specific outcomes, but about continuously expanding the boundaries of acceptable discourse. Each provocative statement serves as a strategic instrument, deliberately designed to recalibrate social and political norms. When he suggests purchasing Greenland or proposing radical reimaginings of geopolitical landscapes like in Gaza, the actual feasibility becomes secondary to the act of introducing previously unthinkable concepts into mainstream conversation.
The genius of this approach lies in its relentlessness. By consistently proposing ideas that initially seem outrageous, extreme positions gradually become reference points for future discussions. Each controversial statement doesn’t just distract from previous controversies; it fundamentally reshapes the political imagination. The goal is not immediate implementation but permanent transformation – moving the entire conceptual framework of what society considers possible.
Russian propagandists were early to grasp its significance, weaponizing the Overton Window theory itself as supposed evidence of Western cultural imperialism. That commander in Donetsk was just echoing what Russian state media had been claiming for years: that the West was deliberately expanding society’s boundaries to impose its values on Russia.
A decade later, we’re watching this process unfold in reverse. As transactional relationships replace values-based alliances, as oligarchic control displaces democratic institutions, as the unthinkable becomes routine – the transformation of our societies isn’t happening by accident.
Through the years of Brexit, Trump’s first win, Orbán’s rise, and the growing global polarization, that conversation in the ruins of Donetsk has stayed with me. There was something chilling about a commander discussing political theory between artillery fire – not because it felt academic, but because he embodied how thoroughly manufactured narratives could drive real-world violence. He was willing to fight and die for a worldview constructed by Russian state media about “traditional values” under attack.
In the end, we are all unwitting participants in this grand narrative shift, our perceptions subtly recalibrated by the very forces that seek to reshape our understanding of what is possible, acceptable, and true. And whether we are shocked by those in power or find ourselves applauding them, we are simultaneously the observers and the changed.
A version of this story was published in this week’s Coda Currents newsletter. Sign up here.