Psychological tactics for avoiding accountability

From the good folks at

Ten Psychological Tactics for Avoiding Climate Science Accountability

According to the article, here are the “tactical tricks”:

Delegate the matter to someone else internally – diffuse it, distance yourself from it – and do everything to avoid an internal and especially an independent review.

Avoid, reword, or repackage, the issues – obfuscate the facts, or at least talk tentatively or vaguely about some mistakes in the past and that you or someone could probably have done a better job on … but go no further; rationalise and/or disguise any culpability.

Focus on minor or “other” things so as to look like you are focusing on the central things, punctuating it all with the language of transparency and accountability.

Appeal to your integrity and to acting with the highest standards, without demonstrating either.

Point out your past track record. Highlight anything positive that you are doing or contributing to now.

Ask and assume that people should trust you without verification. Offer some general assurances that you have or will be looking into the matter and all is okay.

State that you are under attack or at least that you are not being treated fairly or that people just don’t understand.

Mention other peoples’ (alleged) problems, question their motives and credibility; dress someone else in your own dirty clothes, especially if they are noisome question-askers or whistleblowers.

Prop up the old boys’ leadership club, reshuffle the leadership deck if necessary yet without changing leaders or their power or how they can cover for each other in the name of “loyalty” and on behalf of the “greater good”. Try to hold out until the dust settles and the “uncomfortable” stuff hopefully goes away.

So in short, don’t really do anything with real transparency and accountability; rather, maintain your self-interests, lifestyle, affiliations, and allusions of moral congruity, even if it means recalibrating your conscience – essentially, acting corruptly via complicity, cover-ups, and cowardice.

I see so much of this in today’s headlines. Not just in climate change arguments but in nearly every political commentary.

its like politicians studied it years ago.

Weinstein scandal

from time to time there is an exposure in Hollywood or the music industry (remember Milli Vanilli)

while other’s invariably come forward and speak out about “the culture” or “the systemic problem” the result has been and will most likely be the same.

The offender is isolated, estranged, ostracized and eventually destroyed for the protection of all the others. After the blood is cleaned up with rehab and due penance has been paid, the pats on the back will begin about how the issue has been “cleaned up” and “reformed”  or even “fixed”

the only problem with the system is that it’s full of people. And the inevitable consequence of so much power imbued in one or two people will result in the same depravity. Whether it be drugs, sex, or any other perversion they have a predisposition toward.

Fatty Arbuckle, Bob Crane, Colonel Parker and Elvis, Marilyn Monroe. Etc, etc

is there hope? If the draw of fame becomes less valuable than personal integrity then the teeth will be taken from the industry of movies, music, stage, ballet, and any number of other situations. But not likely.

people will be people and the price of fame, be it college grades, promotions, recording contracts, movie deals will be set by those that can and paid by those that are willing.

the problem is that some aren’t so willing. Then the line gets crossed.

Arrest them, investigate them, charge them, convict them of proven crimes, and punish them. The threat of exposure and punishment are the only constrictions on their actions.

My thoughts on the Las Vegas shooting

Let’s  talk honestly about the latest mass murder that has America outraged.

the Las Vegas shooting killed fifty eight (at last count) and wounded hundreds. I don’t want to focus on the shooters motives as we don’t know them yet. The timeline of the shooting, as it is changing and so far a lot of speculation.

So the focus is on the gun. The implement used to commit the crime is the low hanging fruit of mass media at this time.

The Vegas shooting is being touted as the worst mass shooting in American history. Maybe it is, but it is not the worst mass murder in American history.

Timothy McVeigh used a Ryder truck and a load of fertilizer to kill over a hundred and twenty five. The truck driver in Nice drove a truck through a crowd (much like the concert crowd) and killed eighty nine. And of course 9/11 used loaded aircraft to kill thousands. The Ricen attack in Japan, the Anthrax mail attack, the Unabomber never shot anybody.

Has any politician called for the prosecution of Ryder for someone using their truck as a weapon to kill? Banned trucks? Background checks to buy a plane ticket?


the using of a Bump Fire stock by the Las Vegas shooter is about as important and the octane rating of the Nice truck attract fuel. Or the manufacturer of the barrels that McVeigh used in Oklahoma City.

The decision to commit mass murder is the problem, not the tool used to commit the crime.

Had the Vegas killer used the slingshots made for throwing water balloons on the beach to hurl improvised explosives at the crowd been less of a crime? Should he have driven a truck through the crowd?

Not to say that the weapons used are insignificant (obviously they are not) but to focus on them is a misdirection. Many times used by the less moral of us to push an agenda that has little or nothing to do with the act itself.

The idea that the shooter would have been less effective with a normal stock on his rifle is as inane an argument as his choice of ammunition or rifle manufacturer.

The politically genius, but logically foolish, idea that a person who has made the decision, planned, and equipped himself to commit the murder of as many people as possible, would have stopped at the front door due to a sign banning guns on the premises is the height of idiocy.

Evil is in the heart of man, the weapon, tool, implement used to carry out that evil is nearly irrelevant.

Every generation has had the same arguments, going back centuries like;

The cartridge case ammunition will enable soldiers to waste ammunition.

That damn yankee rifle you load on Sunday and shoot all week (lever action)

The wheel lock is made to be easily concealed.

The Roman gladius sword is a killing blade

The iron sword is an advantage over the brass sword

The chariot, the sling, not to mention the bow and arrow at the Battle of Hastings were all criticized by the weak minded and the losing side as unfair, unsporting, uncivil.   I’m sure the mounted knights didn’t like the advent of firearms either.

Will we ever know the circumstance surrounding the motivations or events leading up to the Las Vegas shooting? I hope so.

Should we legislate (“we have do do something”) based on the implement used to commit the act of mass murder? No.

Is there anything that can be done? Maybe.

Perhaps not demonizing anyone who disagrees with you over any and every topic. Grandstanding and triangulating stances on political issues, not based on truth, but sound bites and polling data. Maybe we dont need politicians, but Statesman.

Could anything have prevented this crime. Probably not, but trying to say that if your particular issue had been addressed previously that the deaths would have been fewer or the crime not committed at all and must be implemented now is disingenuous and insincere.

I pray for all the victims and families that have been affected. But please don’t make it about a political party agenda.