from: Bloodstone43956@i-mail.irs
to: Raventrap39996@i-mail.irs
date: 7518.05766
My Dear Raventrap ~
I’ve heard from your Undervisor ~ it seems you’re showing initiative in your work. He seemed a little worried you would have his job before long. This is a favorable sign. I understand you made a fine presentation in which you said the TSA should do everything possible to subvert Our Competitor’s desire that humans “speak the truth in love.” What a wonderful idea! It’s too bad you had to use the curse word, “love,” to make your point. Be that as it may, while we don’t understand that particular word very well, we can certainly use it against our clients. Its meaning is as subject to lies and distortions as any other word, and from what we have been able to understand, if we can succeed in draining it of all meaning, the results can be devastating indeed! Many of my clients have committed serious crimes for “love” because I was successful in twisting its meaning to almost the exact opposite of what Our Competitor seems to have in mind. His strategy of expecting humans to think the best of each other seems so naïve.
I’m gratified you’ve asked me to follow-up on how to “control the conversation.” You asked for more specifics, tricks of the trade, so to speak, to make your clients think they are being open and honest when they are actually being closed and deceptive. You also mentioned you would be working with a number of organizations. Let’s put aside questions of organizational theory as an “emerging market” of temptation for now. By the way, did you know terms like these were invented in our very own DOE ~ Department of Euphemisms?
It is well-known here below that organizations are very fruitful in terms of miscommunication and its resulting feelings of ill-will and isolation. Confusing or mixed messages as well as hidden agendas and obscured information can leave members of any organization feeling powerless and frustrated. Given enough time the organization will falter or fail as members begin to blame each other and quarrel over things better communication could have resolved in a sentence or two. As you know, the destruction of a business, or especially a country, can send many contracts to Hell, not because of heinous acts ~ as appealing as these are ~ but because at these moments, humans are easily tempted to think the worst of each other and lash out based on incorrect or incomplete information or just plain ignorance. The resulting injury and pain may never heal, and in their festering aftermath many contracts can be claimed by Our Executive.
Now, as to how it’s done. In any organization there are two broad areas of disruption to address. I’ll call them overt and covert. In overt disruption of communication, the “leaders” of the organization enact policies that forbid certain kinds of communication in the “best interest” of the organization. For example, employees might be forbidden to discuss wages and benefits under threat of “termination.” Such a sanction really protects owners and management, but let them think it is for the benefit of everyone involved and this kind of threat can both build walls and foster a sense of powerlessness leading to despair. If workers can’t talk about how they are being treated, over time they will be taught to “suck it up,” just do their job, and accept whatever the organization wants them to think is the truth. Ideally, we want workers to “keep their heads down and their mouths shut,” at least publicly.
However, this tactic doesn’t entirely stop communication, because humans are going to talk anyway. Under overt disruption of communication, rumor, gossip, and secrecy will abound, making it easy for our side to subvert communication even more! Overt disruption isn’t difficult for us. It is, after all, hard for humans to put in place fair and open systems of communication. It’s therefore easier for us to convince them to attempt to control the conversation by putting into place policies that actively discourage it, rather than to take the time to subvert each and every conversation as it occurs. At a national level, propaganda, secret police, and widespread surveillance are excellent ways to control the conversation.
On a more covert level, we can always encourage certain secret sanctions against “whistle-blowers” or critics of the system. No matter how factual their comments may be, if you can sway management to stigmatize, marginalize, or even penalize persons who “speak up,” the game is almost won. If others in the organization can also be persuaded to avoid, shun, or distrust such persons as well ~ game-set-match ~ the organization is ours! This is only one of many ways to tempt humans to do our work for us.
Additionally, we can obscure the fact that human nature tends to divide any organization into informal factions. One faction, I’ll call the “in” crowd, is privy to inside information, consulted on all “important” matters, and given leadership on committees, in departments, and so on. All of this, not necessarily because they are able to tell the truth or confront hypocrisy ~ far from it ~ but rather because they don’t make waves, they “go along to get along,” and management is therefore “comfortable” with them. The rest, the “out” crowd, includes those who have questioned, might question, or in some way have failed to properly kowtow to management. They are typically excluded from any positions of real power and their opinions are typically kept at arm’s length or are summarily dismissed, unless they can produce a “strong rationale based on thorough research.”
The “in” crowd is, of course, not held to the same standards ~ their opinions are more often than not assumed to be correct, because they are well-liked and therefore more trusted. Now, here’s the trick: never let management suspect any of this is actually happening. Let them remain fully convinced they’ve only picked the “best man for the job” and are being absolutely impartial. Above all, keep your suggestions subtle, and don’t let management realize they are listening to some staff members but not others until it’s too late. Well-executed marginalization of workers can damage an organization beyond repair and bring many contracts to us in the process. But if management discovers some are being routinely excluded from consideration, they might take steps to include them, and our gambit will not work.
Next, we can influence management to withhold important pieces of information while inundating personnel with superficial or irrelevant information. There is no better way to create the illusion of “open communication” than sharing a lot of meaningless data or announcements. Your clients naturally confuse quantity with quality. Play upon their confusion. If you do this well, they will never suspect, much less question the fact that they are not receiving the information they really need. At the end of the day, the organization will be worse off as those who might realize what’s going on are neutralized overtly or covertly.
You must do your best to convince those in charge they are truly acting for the “good” of their organization. If you keep all other motives hidden from them, this delusion should be relatively easy to maintain. Everyone has ulterior motives. Everyone plays favorites. Everyone has biases and prejudices. Your mission is to keep all of these out of sight, out of mind. The moment your client begins to see his opinion has flaws or his motives may not be pure, you run the risk of having him turn to Our Competitor for guidance and forgiveness. If this happens, I shouldn’t have to tell you the consequences could be calamitous.
If you do things right, you can even talk your clients into believing they are acting in the name of Our Competitor, that He actually endorses their biases and prejudices, and therefore they will conclude their particular interpretation of what is “good” for the organization is beyond question. Keep in mind, in some organizations it’s almost impossible to argue against the “will” of Our Competitor. We can thus turn trust in Our Competitor against those who might need Him most. What an appetizing proposition!
Your Devoted Cousin,
Bloodstone
MurrayWorks 