"My business is deception and business is a boomin'"
As a distinct incivility has descended upon us, the general population has become more comfortable with deception.
Where once I taught my sons to always give up their seats to ladies, we now have "man spreading" so as to ensure the comfort of the man.
|Hope for a better tomorrow...and a gentleman to love my Natalee|
There has always been deception in America, whether the scheming be 1920's bootlegging of dangerous liquor, the polygamy of "soldiers' wives" for allotment, or even the paying of protestors, from the crowd who yelled, "Give us Barrabas!" to "Hands Up!", and every generation in between.
It is just that we have become so accustomed to lying and scandal that we give a collective "yawn" over the latest lie, and go ahead and elect the liar, just the same.
When this picture is shrunk quite a bit, all of the sudden, the impact becomes painful enough to scream.
Thus it is when you work for a liar, as an immediate supervisor or business owner. What you will suffer is as difficult to predict as life itself.
There are universal principles within Statement Analysis that are witnessed in application in all human organizations; from the lone bully who abuses his wife, to the family unit, to all business models, up to the highest levels of government.
1. words reveal us all. The words we choose indicate:
a. Our background
b. Our priorities in life
c. Our experiences in life
d. Our personality
2. all of us project ourselves into human organizations.
This is what they do.
This is what they do no matter where they are found, no matter how deep their authority runs. They control a woman with the threat of violence, in a Domestic Violence relationship, they trouble their family unit, trouble their employees, and in government, they project their opinion backed up with force: their opinion is not 'optional.'
The liar pleases himself above others and if you consider the varying scenarios of which this self-pleasure may take place, your blood will run cold.
The liar also projects himself to all others.
This is where, for example, you encounter a middle manager who harps on employees under the belief that they are all deceptively abusing the company, in any manner from taking too long in break down, lying about sick time, working from home,
They do not trust, for example, their workers with tele-commuting, even though he does not know them personally, as in a large business or department.
Why does he instinctively believe that those who work from home are in their pjs, watching television, rather than working? What has convinced him of the lazy-minded worker mentality?
It is his own deceptive nature which assumes everyone else is just like him. He is projecting himself and his words will show this very thing.
We see this in the political realm anytime someone says something that sounds noble, patriotic, or simply, right.
They are mocked as a liar by those who, themselves, cannot perceive of anyone doing anything from a motive that is upright.
We all reveal ourselves.
First, let's define the liar.
Since all of us lie, are all of us to be classified as liars?
In high school, I saw a marvelous example where a student stood up in class and told the teacher he had cheated on a test, and took a "Zero" instead.
Some of the kids mocked him as if to say, "Who doesn't cheat?", but he was unmoved. He resisted the 'sophisticated' view that "everyone does it" cynicism, which, for any of us at any time, is a real temptation to overcome.
Have I ever cheated on a test?
I thought about this recently in discussions about honesty and in terms of outright cheating on an exam, my memory is hazy.
What I do recall is a time where "my eyes drifted over to the person next to me" and wrote down their answer, feeling terrible about it, and then crossing it out and handing in the wrong answer. Did you notice the passivity in my sentence? It is how I described the incident. It shows an immediate desire to distance myself from the responsibility of my action.
Statement Analysis causes those who engage it it long enough, to begin to question themselves and their own language. It is healthy self discovery and possibly a powerful life changing, extended event.
It takes time.
If I had to answer the question, "Have you ever cheated on a test?" I would have to answer "yes", even though I cant recall a specific event, simply because I do not trust myself; that is, my nature, to be candid. It is no surprise that I struggle here.
There is an interesting study in the Greek language regarding the word "walk."
The ancient Greek had 6 different words for our one word "walk."
Context is key.
It also helps us understand the classification of "liar" for the purposes of our studies.
One word for "walk" means the obvious: putting one foot in front of the other.
Yet it is the use of another word for "walk" which speaks to habitual patterned living.
Everyone puts one foot in front of the other, and everyone has a habitual patterned of living life.
A "liar", as classified statistically and in the analysis of words, is one who's habitual patterned of life includes deception, as a norm, to protect, enhance, and focus upon oneself, even at the expense of truth.
Most people believe that when they die, life had meaning and this meaning will impact what happens to them after life has ended. These people, therefore, believe that a supreme being, or "god", created them with a purpose.
Philosophers have long noted the futility of life without purposeful meaning.
The majority of men who founded our country believed this, and believed that the Creator (note the change) revealed His will for life, through a series of statements, over years, in ancient Israel and that inspire of the many years, many authors and many languages, the entire compilation, called The Bible, is the revealed Word of God.
This is why they had people in court, for example, place their hand upon it and swear to tell the truth, leaving nothing out, but the entire truth, before said God, Who, if lied to under oath, would exact justice, in this life, or the life to come.
An interesting case study in this very thing (oath-taking) was seen in the Casey Anthony trial when her mother, Cindy Anthony, took the oath several times.
In some testimony, she said, on her own, "so help me", while in other testimony upon recall, she said, herself, "so help me God."
What was the difference in resulting testimony?
"So help me, God" was deliberate deception.
Cindy Anthony's "walk" in life is deception, and with the backdrop of statistics that show, leaping ahead through life, that a liar is "a murderer in training", that is, one who puts his or her own needs above all others, should this same person's "walk" lead them to have to testify in a capital case, would indeed lie to protect oneself. They would have an innocent person put to death to save their own selves. The man who said, "it depends upon what the definition of "is" is" revealed himself as a liar; that is, one who's character was formed very early in life specifically to please himself over all others. Therefore, as I listened to the parade of women who claimed rape or sexual assault, and the parade of denials issued, which is how media portrayed it, I knew more than just, "where there is smoke, there is fire" but there was a man who would do or take that which he wanted, or pleased him, others be damned.
"Just because someone tells a few mistruths doesn't make her a murderer." Cindy Anthony.
Ancient writing about Pontius Pilate indicated that he was a ruthless politician with lots and lots of ambition. He both feared and desired Rome. He was said to have his enemies go missing at the slightest concern of competition.
In the trial of Christ, he knew he had an innocent before him, on trial for envy. He knew he was in a tough spot:
If I set Christ free because He has done no crime, the mob will turn on me and this will eventually reach Rome.
The mob also knew this. They deliberately charged Christ with threatening Pilate's status and claims on future employment to the point where they said, by a few degrees of separation:
"Caesar is our king. This man claims to be king. You, Pilate, by not killing him are being disloyal to Caesar."
The crowd, too, was purchased, just like in Ferguson and Baltimore today. It is not a new trick of liars, but an ancient one.
Pilate was married to a young, beautiful wife, and it was said that she was the only one he might yield to.
In the middle of the night, she woke up with nightmares and rushed to her husband and warned him to have nothing to do with the railroading of the innocent.
Pilate had been warned by the one means in life that he would listen to, only heightening his own fall.
When his time in life came as it does come to many, his ultimate test; that is, what he has been remembered for centuries, proved itself out: he failed at the truth, but there is something he said that is our lesson for today:
"What is truth?"
This is an example of the cynical projection of liars that impacts individuals, families, departments, businesses and countries. It presupposes a "sophistication" that only some of "us" possess. Don't you want to join "us"? Don't you want to join in and say, "Everyone is a liar. No politician can ever have a decent motive."?
Join "us" and be as "sophisticated" as us.
Thus, the appeal of the lie and the temptation to justify via projection. This is why you must hire, promote, or elect someone who has never acquired the comfort with lies that the 'true liar' has.
Liars believe everyone is just like them.
All children lie, as it is human nature to do so. They are little narcissists who need to be taught to consider the well being of others. This is commonly called "empathy."
The controversial "Bell Curve" interviewed many parents in different locales and concluded that:
Most all parents disciplined their kids, for example, when one struck his sibling. This was universal.
But many did so by adding an element: empathy.
All said, "Johnny, don't hit your sister, Susie."
But those who said, "Johnny, don't hit your sister, Susie. It hurts her when you do so." (or something similar, including the older lessons of "never hit a girl").
The liar was either:
uncorrected for lying, or, was taught the consequences of lying against himself, only, yet void of empathy for others. The researchers found a correlation between violence and this simple difference, including prison statistics.
The Liar, that is, the Deceptive Person, is often lacking in true empathy for others.
In fact, you have seen many times that liars seem to hold a particular contempt for everyone else--or, at least those who disagree with them.
This is a great advantage for truth seekers.
When the person's "walk", that is, habituated pattern of life, is to lie:
1. The person thinks themselves more worthy than everyone else
2. The person will say things that are not true, if it benefits the self
3. The person lacks human empathy, even when feigning empathy (something trained professionals in social services often spot)
4. The lying person will presuppose something about you, the intended recipient of the lie:
That you are not smart enough to catch on to the lie.
This is where the contempt comes from.
The liar lied in childhood and likely either was ignored for it, or experienced a consequence that did not include empathy for the recipient of the lie.
The lie told in kindergarten saved him from losing his crayons. To the child, this felt like success. Success breeds repetition.
The lie made the child feel in control, and a sense of superiority. Any anxiety felt over it quickly dissipated while holding those precious crayons. "She did it; no me!" worked.
This grows and then combines with hormonal increase in adolescents. Should we add in substance abuse, and we have the perfect storm:
Depression lifted by substance abuse does make the one feel better. Lying is already part of his or her life.
Next, the obtaining of substances becomes key, and the lies increase for its implementation.
Minimization becomes as easy as breathing to all of us, how much more so to the liar who becomes addicted? It's difficult to measure.
But even without the element of addiction, let's look at the progression of the liar.
The liar projects that everyone is a liar, and everyone is driven by self interest and that no one is to be trusted because:
he is a liar;
he is driven by self interest;
he cannot be trusted.
He then is buttressed by a specific element within his lies:
He believes, cynically, these things. He holds his targeted audience in contempt for being gullible.
The cynicism itself says:
"If you were only smarter, you would see that these employees cannot be trusted" and you, as a subordinate, do not want to be thought of as inferior, are tempted to go along with him, lest you too be seen as:
Not sophisticated enough to see "the obvious."
This is a powerful element and it is what specifically infects those under authority: Either you are one of us, or you are one of "them" with "them" being unsophisticated, 'polly-anna' dreamers who are not worthy of promotion because they do not understand "the real world." You lack sophistication and cunning.
This is the distinct flavor that flows from the liar as soon as he is promoted, in whatever human organization has been established.
The liar does not see that there are those who are literally afraid to place their hand on the Bible and lie. These are "superstitious", "unsophisticated" fools, meant to be exploited and ridiculed.
This was seen in a great movie, "The Best Years of Our Lives" when, shortly after WWII, a young man who had lost an arm in the war was in a diner having a soda when a stranger expresses his sympathy to the man for having lost his arm "for no good reason." His point was that the war was "for suckers only" and his sacrifice was in vain. He pointed to the newspaper and instructed the young soldier to "read it for yourself; it's all here" and plain to see for anyone 'smart enough' or 'sophisticated enough' to see it.
When a liar is promoted, even in small manners, he or she will resent those who disagree with him.
Who are those who disagree?
They are those who do not agree with his assessment of workers.
I once interviewed a woman who was nearing retirement after decades of devoted and honorable service. She developed a reputation for honesty which, in meetings with superiors, did not always endear her to them. She was no contrarian, which sometimes hides behind "it's the truth" like stances. She was honest through and through. The honesty was seen whenever she made an error and owned it. She talked about two years of her life that were "hell" to her, but taught her invaluable lessons in life.
She had steadily earned promotions but at this point found herself answering directly to a liar.
Like most liars, he was quite pragmatic. In other words, he had no qualms about lying as long as the result came in the way he wanted. This meant not only cutting corners, but bypassing specific laws.
The woman, raised to be honest, politely responded that she was unable to do this or that activity, as it was either unethical, against policy, or even, against the law.
He took to making her life miserable, each and every day. "Do as you are instructed to do!" was a continual threat that she eventually learned how to handle properly. She could not report him to his superiors, lest she be labeled as a trouble maker and her already hostile work environment become even worse.
Her only defense was: "If you want this done, please put it in writing" and began to use email as a way to protect herself. He refused.
She then would write things such as, "I just want to be clear on your directive. You said I should **** and *** today. Am I correct?"
He angrily deleted these emails and created a severely hostile work environment for her, anyway.
She said it may have been the most difficult two years of her life, and it dramatically impacted her physical and mental health and eventually was forced to seek professional help in just coping with the day to day stress.
She kept a carefully written journal, using dates, times and quotes, should a situation arise where he falsely accused her of something.
What she found out was:
The journaling, itself, was even more effective than seeing a counselor, and...
As the pressure eased on her, since the writing gave her clarity, she was able to "outlast him" at the position, and his lies eventually caught up to him and he was faced with disgraceful demotion or he could retire.
To this day, I admire her.
She said that after this, she had a wisdom in handling liars, including avoiding provocation within a challenge. She "knew" a great deal about Statement Analysis, instinctively, from the "lessons" this man taught her.
She looks back in life and is thankful for the difficult lessons.
The liar wants you to think that you must be "sophisticated enough" to agree with him, but if you do not agree with his assessment about ________ (fill in the blank), you are a fool. You are not "one of us." You are not "the best and the brightest." You are not "a go getter", a "success", a "winner." I have heard all of these terms used by many people who worked under a liar.
After an invitation to speak, a woman approached me and said "I work for a liar."
She said it with force, but with a sense of relief and her words that followed were easily predictable:
"You understand me." She was grateful and felt that someone understood the intense, day to day pressure she lives with. She said he was also a cocaine addict.
I could write an entire article speculating on how she has suffered but it would hold no surprises.
She did not work for a man who lied about being 5 minutes late for work, or for a man who politely lied about co-worker's new hair do.
She worked for a man who could lie, at any time, for any reason that was to his advantage.
Liars are not predictable.
This, itself, could use a lengthy article. I have dedicated my life to discerning deception and I am unable to give an exhaustive response to anyone, about what a liar might do. I can look at the context and the degree of authority the liar has, and weigh out statistics, especially for employers, but liars are consistent in this one thing:
They continually surprise me in the creative ways in which a liar brings heartache and damage to his audience.
What is the difference between two men here:
Both are in positions of authority.
Both were sexually molested in childhood leading to perverse impulses.
One will sexually harass a co-worker, causing her pain of various impact, while costing the company untold embarrassment and legal costs.
The other will restrain his impulse and not act it out.
What is the difference between the two?
As Europe heads towards "disability status" for pedophiles, and shifting understandings of responsibility, no matter how it is viewed:
The one who acts upon his impulse is going to bring pain, suffering, and loss to those around him.
It is imperative that the deceptive one is discerned as one who will do what pleases him, in increasing intensity and scope, no matter the cost to others.