I've been belaboring a point of late, a term, a concept- impunity.
Impunity is the ultimate expression of dominance. To wit, the person cloaked in impunity can say (in various ways) 'I get to do what I want, when I want, wherever I want, to whom I choose, and there is simply nothing you schlubs can do about it.'
I've been belaboring a point of late, a term, a concept- impunity.
Impunity is the ultimate expression of dominance. To wit, the person cloaked in impunity can say (in various ways) 'I get to do what I want, when I want, wherever I want, to whom I choose, and there is simply nothing you schlubs can do about it.'
Impunity is the true aspiration of every wannabe dictator, but also violent predators like Andrew Tate (current residence, prison in Romania, because he and his brother held women captive to repeatedly rape them; he's a role model of real men who are disciples of Jordan Peterson).
Money helps, of course, and celebrity (ask Johnny Depp and Amber Heard). Mostly, being male is most important. The cis gender hetero type.
Money and celebrity are mechanisms and perks; the riff raff wait in line, or can't get in the front door, to that club or restaurant, but someone with a recognizable name and reputation for bulging pockets of coin get right in. Ask Prince Andrew, who also embodies a key element of impunity, immunity from prosecution.
Impunity, ultimately, when done right, means freedom from constraint, including freedom from the prospect criminal laws will be applied to you.
Few reach that vaunted level of impunity. Franco and Pinochet had it. Putin is there. Trump and DeSantis (and Gaetz, of course) so badly want to be there.
The lesser iterations attempt to acquire impunity in their limited sphere of influence, but are compelled to camouflage their conduct, and speak in code (Peterson, and types like him, are especially useful for constructing word-salad defenses of dominance and impunity, with a wink and a nod, plausible deniability and some such.)
But these lesser iterations are champing at the bit, beside themselves that they are constrained in another way- they want to proclaim their impunity, their dominance to do what they want, when they want, wherever they want, to whom they choose, and there is simply nothing the schlubs can do about it.
But if they 'spoke their truth', the woke mob will cancel them.
The impunity crowd, it seems, is oppressed by the very riff-raff that are supposed to simply submit to their natural rulers. It's an inversion of the natural order!
Impunity types are big on the natural order, who's supposed to be able to act without constraint , and who not. Just ask Nietzsche. You know, impunity types are born with massive genetic endowments, and really want the rest of us to admire those massive genetic endowments.
This is a great comment! I have studied HOW people, " get away with" saying things like death threats toward others, violent rhetoric toward individuals & inciting violence. They I figured out what would stop them from getting away with it. Specifically I focused on their ability to profit from what they were saying. . One of the way they "get away with it" is if it makes them, or someone else, money.
When I convinced the advertisers of the radio hosts on KSFO to stop funding the host's violent rhetoric, the radio station stopped making money on those ads. One host did not have her contract renewed because she was no longer generating big Revenue in line with her salary. She wasn't let go for what she said, but because it became unacceptable to the advertisers. The listeners of the right wing radio station found the violent rhetoric acceptable. And they kept tuning in. But a big audience without advertising Revenue was not desirable. Another one of the hosts was a sexist, bigot who called for the genocide of an entire group of people. The listeners, and the local management, did not have a problem with his comments but after I alerted them, the advertisers did. His contact wasn't up yet, so they kept him on. Management hoped they could get new advertisers who were fine with his bigotry, sexism & violent rhetoric. But I stayed on the case, alerting the ad buyers that his show was toxic. Finally the station fired him 6 months before his contract was up so they could get revenue in the time slot. If the 2 hosts had billionaire backers who were willing to lose money to keep they audience and to keep their message out there, they might still be there today. I used the disgust of the advertisers to what rh hosts said to get them to pull ads. The pressure of lack of ad revenue to the radio station got them to fire the hosts (the hosts COULD have stopped calling for the Death of people on the air, but they didn't. They doubled down. They lost their livelihood doing radio. The advertisers were the ones who said this kind of talk will not generate revenue from us. The hosts could still say it. It could still be popular. But not as profitable as before.
I've been belaboring a point of late, a term, a concept- impunity.
Impunity is the ultimate expression of dominance. To wit, the person cloaked in impunity can say (in various ways) 'I get to do what I want, when I want, wherever I want, to whom I choose, and there is simply nothing you schlubs can do about it.'
Impunity is the true aspiration of every wannabe dictator, but also violent predators like Andrew Tate (current residence, prison in Romania, because he and his brother held women captive to repeatedly rape them; he's a role model of real men who are disciples of Jordan Peterson).
Money helps, of course, and celebrity (ask Johnny Depp and Amber Heard). Mostly, being male is most important. The cis gender hetero type.
Money and celebrity are mechanisms and perks; the riff raff wait in line, or can't get in the front door, to that club or restaurant, but someone with a recognizable name and reputation for bulging pockets of coin get right in. Ask Prince Andrew, who also embodies a key element of impunity, immunity from prosecution.
Impunity, ultimately, when done right, means freedom from constraint, including freedom from the prospect criminal laws will be applied to you.
Few reach that vaunted level of impunity. Franco and Pinochet had it. Putin is there. Trump and DeSantis (and Gaetz, of course) so badly want to be there.
The lesser iterations attempt to acquire impunity in their limited sphere of influence, but are compelled to camouflage their conduct, and speak in code (Peterson, and types like him, are especially useful for constructing word-salad defenses of dominance and impunity, with a wink and a nod, plausible deniability and some such.)
But these lesser iterations are champing at the bit, beside themselves that they are constrained in another way- they want to proclaim their impunity, their dominance to do what they want, when they want, wherever they want, to whom they choose, and there is simply nothing the schlubs can do about it.
But if they 'spoke their truth', the woke mob will cancel them.
The impunity crowd, it seems, is oppressed by the very riff-raff that are supposed to simply submit to their natural rulers. It's an inversion of the natural order!
Impunity types are big on the natural order, who's supposed to be able to act without constraint , and who not. Just ask Nietzsche. You know, impunity types are born with massive genetic endowments, and really want the rest of us to admire those massive genetic endowments.
Or fear them.
Both, of course.
This is a great comment! I have studied HOW people, " get away with" saying things like death threats toward others, violent rhetoric toward individuals & inciting violence. They I figured out what would stop them from getting away with it. Specifically I focused on their ability to profit from what they were saying. . One of the way they "get away with it" is if it makes them, or someone else, money.
When I convinced the advertisers of the radio hosts on KSFO to stop funding the host's violent rhetoric, the radio station stopped making money on those ads. One host did not have her contract renewed because she was no longer generating big Revenue in line with her salary. She wasn't let go for what she said, but because it became unacceptable to the advertisers. The listeners of the right wing radio station found the violent rhetoric acceptable. And they kept tuning in. But a big audience without advertising Revenue was not desirable. Another one of the hosts was a sexist, bigot who called for the genocide of an entire group of people. The listeners, and the local management, did not have a problem with his comments but after I alerted them, the advertisers did. His contact wasn't up yet, so they kept him on. Management hoped they could get new advertisers who were fine with his bigotry, sexism & violent rhetoric. But I stayed on the case, alerting the ad buyers that his show was toxic. Finally the station fired him 6 months before his contract was up so they could get revenue in the time slot. If the 2 hosts had billionaire backers who were willing to lose money to keep they audience and to keep their message out there, they might still be there today. I used the disgust of the advertisers to what rh hosts said to get them to pull ads. The pressure of lack of ad revenue to the radio station got them to fire the hosts (the hosts COULD have stopped calling for the Death of people on the air, but they didn't. They doubled down. They lost their livelihood doing radio. The advertisers were the ones who said this kind of talk will not generate revenue from us. The hosts could still say it. It could still be popular. But not as profitable as before.