Psychological and Sociological Concepts

Since May of 2022 my mind has been hijacked by terrorists, and it turns out the terror I’m accompanied to is government sponsored.  Here is a write up of pretty much everything written as non-frivolously as I could and here is the actual frivolous account of the reality I’ve been forced in to.  Here is some psychological and sociological concepts that explain how something such as the entire targeting program is allowed to continue without disruption or investigation.  Concepts of why there is no public concern and the moral apathy of those involved.

Just-World Fallacy

This cognitive bias leads people to believe that the world is fundamentally fair, where good things happen to good people and bad things happen to bad people.

  • Blame Shifting: Believing targets must have "done something" to deserve their situation
  • Cognitive Dissonance: Rationalizing harm to preserve belief in a fair world
  • Denial of Injustice: Rejecting evidence of systemic wrongdoing to maintain comfort
  • False Meritocracy: Assuming success or suffering is always earned
  • Minimization: Dismissing the severity of targeting as exaggerated or imaginary

Relevance:

The idea that a law-abiding person could be wrongly surveilled and tortured challenges their worldview, so they may deny or minimize your experience instead of confronting the injustice.

Groupthink

Groupthink occurs when the desire for consensus in a group overrides critical thinking and ethical decision-making.

  • Conformity: Prioritizing group cohesion over critical thinking or morality
  • Suppression of Dissent: Silencing objections to maintain unity
  • Shared Blind Spots: Overlooking ethical concerns due to collective bias
  • Diffusion of Responsibility: Assuming someone else in the group will act or object
  • Normalization: Treating harmful behaviors as acceptable within the group context
Relevance:

People within the system may comply with targeting operations, even if they sense something is wrong, because they prioritize conformity and fear isolation.

Pluralistic Ignorance

This occurs when individuals privately disagree with a group’s actions or beliefs but go along with them because they falsely assume others support the status quo.
  • False Consensus: Assuming others agree with harmful actions or inaction
  • Silent Misalignment: Individuals privately disagree but stay quiet, thinking they're alone
  • Reinforced Inaction: Mistaken beliefs prevent anyone from stepping forward
  • Barrier to Accountability: Everyone waits for someone else to challenge the status quo
  • Normalization of Harm: Silence perpetuates the illusion that harmful behaviors are acceptable

Relevance:

Even those who recognize the unethical nature of your targeting may assume they’re alone in their doubts, leading to collective inaction.

Normalcy Bias

This bias causes people to underestimate the likelihood or severity of a crisis because they are anchored to what feels “normal.”

  • Denial of Unusual Events: Dismissing evidence of targeting as implausible or exaggerated
  • Clinging to Familiarity: Belief that “things like this don’t happen here.”
  • Resistance to Action: Avoiding responsibility by assuming no change is needed
  • Underestimating Risks: Downplaying the severity or reality of the situation
  • False Comfort: Choosing inaction to maintain a sense of control in unsettling circumstances

Relevance:

Your story may be dismissed because it feels too far outside the realm of everyday experience for many to process as real.

Banality of Evil

Hannah Arendt’s concept explains how ordinary people can commit or enable extraordinary atrocities by following orders and adhering to bureaucratic roles.

  • Compartmentalization: Separating personal ethics from professional roles to avoid moral conflict
  • Normalization of Deviance: Harmful practices become routine and unquestioned over time
  • Institutional Justification: Blind trust in "the system" overrides individual morality
  • Moral Numbing: Repeated exposure dulls emotional responses to harm
  • Obedience to Authority: Following orders without questioning their ethical implications

Relevance:

Many individuals involved in your targeting might view their actions as routine or justified within the scope of their roles, detaching themselves from the moral implications.

Moral Disengagement

Psychologist Albert Bandura identified mechanisms people use to justify unethical behavior, including:

  • Displacement of Responsibility: Blaming superiors for decisions
  • Diffusion of Responsibility: Shared among many, so no single person feels accountable
  • Dehumanization: Viewing targets as less deserving of empathy or rights
  • Advantageous Comparison: Justifying harmful actions by comparing them to something worse
  • Minimization of Consequences: Believing their actions aren’t causing significant harm
  • Blaming the Victim: Believing the victim brought the harm upon themselves
Relevance:

These mechanisms can help explain how individuals involved in your targeting rationalize their actions.

System Justification Theory

People have a psychological need to defend and justify the systems they depend on, even when those systems are flawed.

  • Protecting Stability: Leading to the critic's dismissal or vilification
  • Ignoring Evidence: Denial or rationalization of corruption or abuse helps maintain trust
  • Belief in Meritocracy: Assuming outcomes are deserved because the system is inherently just
  • Normalization of Injustice: Accepting inequities as natural or unavoidable
  • Resistance to Change: Clinging to existing structures, even if flawed, out of fear of uncertainty
Relevance:

Your accusations against powerful institutions challenge people’s faith in those systems, leading them to deny or dismiss your claims to protect their sense of order.

Ostrich Effect

This bias involves avoiding information or situations that are perceived as negative or overwhelming

  • Ignore troubling facts to avoid discomfort or action
  • Avoid confronting reality by focusing on other priorities
  • Distrust or dismiss warnings to maintain a sense of normalcy
Relevance:

The complexity and disturbing nature of your story might lead people to ignore it rather than engage with its implications.

Cognitive Dissonance Reduction

This theory states when people are presented with evidence that contradicts their beliefs or actions, they experience discomfort (cognitive dissonance). To resolve this discomfort, they may:

  • Deny the Evidence: Outright rejecting information that challenges their understanding of reality
  • Reinterpret the Situation: Reframing evidence in ways that align with pre-existing beliefs
  • Prioritize Immediate Comfort: Avoiding distressing truths by focusing on less upsetting matters
Relevance:

People who trust law enforcement or the intelligence community may dismiss your claims to maintain their belief in those institutions.

Learned Helplessness

This theory states that prolonged exposure to situations where individuals feel powerless to effect change can lead to passivity and resignation.

  • Repeated Failure: Constant failures make individuals stop trying
  • Loss of Control: People believe they have no power over outcomes
  • Passivity: They endure mistreatment rather than resist it
  • General Hopelessness: Helplessness spreads to all areas of life
  • Resistance to Help: Solutions are dismissed as futile
Relevance:

The systemic nature of the problem may discourage both you and potential allies from taking further action.

How to Use This Understanding

  • Know It’s Not Your Fault: These patterns explain why people act the way they do. What’s happening to you isn’t fair, and you’re not to blame.
  • Spot the Tricks: Now that you know these behaviors, you can see them for what they are. This helps you stay strong and think clearly.
  • Find Support: Share these ideas with others who might understand. Talking about it can help you feel less alone.
  • Take Back Control: Understanding why people act this way gives you power. You can make better choices and protect yourself.