Plausible Deniability refers to the ability of a psychopath or group of psychopaths to exploit the good nature of the people around them. So, for a very simple example, consider the robberies seen in Britain in the last few years where thieves pretend to be 'from the gas company' to inspect an elderly resident's meter. Then once they let in these 'gas men', things turn nasty and they get robbed or worse.
(for what it's worth, I don't believe you can tell someone is evil just from their genes, but nonetheless pure evil seems hereditary. Rockefeller?)
Fraudsters live on plausible deniability (in other words, the act of leaving enough doubt in the victim's mind that they conform to the social norms and do not suspect the criminal, because openly suspecting the criminal of wrongdoing seems like a paranoid thing to do). They actively seek targets who are gullible enough to remain suspended in plausible deniability while they are being robbed (they may say things like, 'oh he wouldn't do that').
But there is a section of the population that is much more able to scam, defraud and trick, than anyone else. And we are led to who this group is, when we look at WHO fraudsters choose to impersonate.
Ever seen The Real Hustle or something similar? The best scams are when the con artists take on the appearance of authority figures. Who are authority figures? People we are trained to look up to. Those wealthier than ourselves. Professionals (not just 'gas men', try doctors, like Harold Shipman, who got away in a state of plausible deniability while killing scores of elderly patients). Most importantly, anyone who wields power. Police. Security. Officials in fine hats. You obey them like you are trained to, and have been trained to since birth.
So then, does it not follow, that if one small section of the corrupted percentage of our population seeks to pretend to be these people, do other corrupt types not seek such positions of authority for real? Can they not operate with maximum plausible deniability, when they are within the establishment?
What I am saying is that people believe government or big business (really government is little more than the biggest, most evil business of all) are out to help them and protect them at all times and can essentially do no wrong except when they make 'mistakes' (another example of plausible deniability, like when drug companies 'accidentally' contaminate vaccines with live bird flu and get away with it - oops!).
Thus criminal members of the establishment operate with unparalelled plausible deniability shielding them from account for their crimes. They can invade whole countries, kill over a million people, and then smile afterwards, give a good old shrug of the shoulders, say it was a mistake and that there was intelligence failure, then walk off like nothing happened, still covered by the mind-control-esque phenomenon where the public decides these crimes are plausibly deniable, therefore denies them.
Of course there is a price to pay for ignoring the fact that you have been scammed...which, obviously, is the fact that you will be scammed again. Probably by the same people in the same way.
Which is why one of my favourite quotes, coming from Ayn Rand, goes like this:
"We can evade reality; but we cannot evade the consequences of evading reality."
We cannot evade the reality that evil people in government, big business etc, historically and today, are exploiting the majority of people, under the cover provided by plausible deniability. It may be easier to pretend mass murder, large scale theft and fraud, are 'mistakes', but mark my words - the establishment is not incompetent. Rather it is genius. It is we that are incompetent, if we cannot see that they are evil. This is a simple truth, without the realisation of which, the problems of today cannot be solved.
________________________________________________________________
Next we must consider how the smartest criminals and psychopaths are able to operate their heinous deeds as part of a group, gang or such - manipulating others to do their bidding while remaining disconnected from the direct acts of evil themselves...therefore protecting themselves further from any attempt to hold them accountable by good people.
It's called Compartmentalisation, and I'll write about that soon.
A lot of conmen rely on their victims' greed to perpetrate the scam ... like the fake diamond sellers of South East Asia ... as the saying goes "if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is!"
ReplyDeleteCorrect sir. That is another example that holds true when applied to governments - people prefer the fake prosperity provided by inflationary policy to the idea of an honest monetary system which doesn't benefit a handful of elite interests.
ReplyDeleteOur economy sounded too good to be true for a while, didn't it? ;)
(Too Bad It Was All Fake Wealth)