a.k.a. Barack Hussein Obama, America, armed society, Bailouts, cronyism, faux victimization, game theory, government, History, Moral hazards, Obama Administration, politics, provocation, psycho-politics, Psychological Hazard, Race Politics, social insanity, Sociopolitical manipulation, State religion, subterfuge, Tyranny
Psychological Hazard: Sociopolitical Manipulation – What part of ‘deplorable’ do we not understand?
Even now, many may not be aware of this type of hazard. Politicians and their cohorts are nothing less than master manipulators and this has been so throughout history. They play up their charms, pit adults, cultural environments and institutions against one another, all while politicizing any real and/or imagined victimization; encouraging covert and overt provocations; instigating destructive protests and generating loud public wailing with multi-level subterfuge in order to maintain their power and control over “the people,” or to manipulate some facet of the system to their financial advantage.
Viewing this from another perspective, there is an ancient story of how King Solomon was said to have applied a solution to a particular “social justice” problem he was asked to resolve. In the story, Solomon’s decisive action illustrated to the people, that there were just some things that can’t be cut in half without revealing the truth behind it, and the proposed action by the king was in no way considered as a noncredible threat to the ancient mind.
See A. Althouse, Beyond King Solomon’s Harlots: Women in Evidence, 65 So. Cal. L. Rev. 1265 (1992). Althouse’s alternative explanation of the biblical story (versions of which exist in many other cultures) is that it is a fiction designed to legitimize Solomon’s attempt to make a transition from military conqueror to legitimate sovereign by demonstrating the wisdom of his judgment, but that, in fact, it does just the opposite if closely examined. Althouse argues that it is at least a reasonable interpretation that the first woman yielded to the king when he flaunted his physical power and authority. The Other, whom history brands the bad, selfish woman, resists power, continues to assert her claim, and stands on principle, even in the face of a great loss. We can read the Other woman’s statement as an outcry against injustice and brutality, a breakdown of reason. Indeed, the Other’s comment comes only after the [“good”] One’s concession of the child and thus does not appear to be a product of reason. If the Other were truly cold and calculating, she could have simply kept her silence and received the child….
[B]ald power transmutes into the appearance of reason! The king lifts a murderous sword, and we manage to perceive it as a coup of reason, attributing to him not ruthless brutality, but amazing and modern wisdom….
As shown, the act of sustaining an elaborate lie not only exerts psychological discomfort but also physical manifestations. Eventually it will be figured out that being honest is much easier and can be far more productive in the long run.
For parties refusing to work together, we see the principle of the prisoner’s dilemma being applied. In it, an option is given each with the same reward or punishment based on their joint level of performance. If one subject rejects the solution, and the other one refuses to cooperate, both lose out. Over time, this method of action can compel cooperation, and unity in the form of a non-zero sum solution.
To be successful, moral hazards must be avoided. Bailouts and cronyism of any kind only offset responsibility while perpetuating, and incentivizing bad behaviors — this fate can be avoided by establishing clear rules and meting out the appropriate punishment, without giving unfair and preferential treatment to any particular group or culture, at the expense of all the others.
Note: This Image has been censored by WordPress, Google and/or others