When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the losers.
Socrates
We are social animals and one of our most valuable resources that we take for granted is our social status - where we stack up in relation to our peers. We are constantly evaluating our place and whether, and to what degree, we are esteemed, so in the game of psychological war, attacking someone’s status is like taking out their Queen in chess. Character assassination is a targeted and continual attempt to damage someone’s reputation or their credibility.
Most places have defamation and libel laws so a person usually doesn’t get away with an outright lie in the public square, but it’s not impossible. Usually character assassinations have to do with someone doing some digging to find a person’s most socially damaging skeleton. The moral attitudes of society change over time, so for greatest damage you find something that involves a violation of the most sacred current social norm. There was a time that being accused of communism was devastating to one’s reputation. Today it’s hard to think of any causes more sacred in the western world than racial or sexual discrimination, and so they should be, but if maximum damage is to be levied, one would focus on exposing some kind of racist or homophobic behaviour. That being said, if we have progressed at all in these matters, and I believe we have, then by definition anyone who has been alive before 2015 will inevitably have said something or done something that is no longer socially acceptable. Nevertheless, it is a very common tactic if you want to stop someone from running for office or more importantly hosting the Oscars or telling jokes on a stage.
Public accusations serve multiple purposes. At the simplest level it tarnishes a person’s reputation causing significant damage. Strategically, an accusation can also bait a person into a public interaction that they can’t possibly win. Public denials are rarely worth it and end up forcing the accused into further self incrimination. Public apologies , even when crafted by the best public relations teams, do not succeed in restoring reputation. The court of public opinion will hear but rarely accept apologies. Saying sorry to the masses is merely seen as an admission of guilt. Either way the accused is painted into a corner out of which the only escape comes at a great cost.
People will fight for their reputation and not just because it’s how they earn a living or because they want people to like them. I write this on the day of the Johnny Depp/ Amber Heard decision. For us simpletons we can ask, what does Johnny care what she says? He’s rich enough already isn’t he? Is that extra $10 million really going to make that much of a difference? The money is more of a token to represent what is really at stake which is far more valuable than a dollar amount. A person’s social status is not just their ticket to earn a living, it correlates with their mental health. When we feel like we are high in status or if our star is rising, we have self esteem, triggered primarily by the neurotransmitter serotonin. Jordan Peterson is famous or infamous for constantly citing the Kravitz study that showed even lobsters act like they are higher status when given antidepressants which boost the amount of serotonin in the brain. When you feel like your stock is dropping and you’re at the bottom of the barrel, last in the pecking order, you presumably have a drop in serotonin, and are depressed. We evolved this type of social alarm system because it was an existential catastrophe if we were low in status. This would mean less access to resources, food, and mating options. We are hardwired to care about where our place is in society and this can be manipulated and it can be attacked.
It doesn't take much imagination to come up with ways that a person could attack someone’s social status. We have countless fictional examples from television and movies about bullies trying to humiliate someone publicly. The tactics tend to separate by gender. Men, if you can call them that, are more likely to use physical aggression and intimidation when they humiliate someone publicly. Think Mr. Heyman giving adolescent George Costanza an atomic wedgie in front of his classmates in the locker room or Scut Farcus making his classmates scream uncle in the holiday classic “A Christmas Story”. This is the bully sending a message to everyone else that this kid is physically inferior and therefore socially inferior and that the aggressor is the dominant force. There is no doubt that boys and men are more likely to engage in physical aggression like this but if one were truly looking to assert dominance, one should consider how the culture has changed over the generations. In professional wrestling terms, this type of character assasination has a risk of “babyfacing” your target, or in other words, the bullied will likely get sympathy from the masses making the bully the unscrupulous heel and at risk of losing status.
In current events, Vladimir Putin tried to move in as a liberating hero, and I suppose on his end of the spin cycle there are some who believe him but what he ended up doing to his great detriment was babyfacing Ukraine who had their own skeletons, scandals, and inner conflicts. The world got behind Zelensky and the blue and yellow so fervently that they even forgot all about COVID. Now the American hawks can swoop in for the hot tag and deliver a blow to Putin’s bad guys and look the hero. The problem of course is that instead of steel cage matches at WrestleMania we’re talking about nuclear ping pong. I’m sure it will sort itself out though right? What could possibly happen when a hyper-masculine ego-maniac with nuclear weapons is painted into a corner?
Then there is the more femenine and sophisticated approach to character assassination that is used with more precision by the fairer sex. While men are more physically aggressive, when we include social aggression, women and girls demonstrate just as much bullying as boys do. Feminine character assassination targets a person’s general reputation. Instead of trying to make someone appear weak or emasculated they aim to make them appear lower class, unsophisticated, or out of touch. Going back to Seinfeld, when Elaine hears about atomic wedgies she says that “boys are sick” and that girls would never do anything like that. They just “tease someone until they develop an eating disorder.”
Women and girls are more likely to ostracize and exclude a person or spread rumours and gossip. It’s much easier to mask this type of bullying as it doesn’t appear to be as aggressive as physical bullying does and it can also be justified more easily on moral grounds (ie. “I was just telling people about her S.T.I. out of concern!”) Amongst each other, girls will often attack another female’s sexual reputation. Basically any way to passive-aggressively make the other person feel out of place. These are all tricks to establish someone’s social undesirability so that they can’t benefit from potential sympathetic supporters.
Professional wrestling provides an over the top projection of this type of human nature and there is a live crowd reacting to the spectacle. We all know the fighting is not real but the psychology around “kayfabe” or the act of making wrestling look authentic is that they are trying to get the fans to care about the competition in the ring. They need someone to cheer for and someone to boo. So to establish a “heel” they present a likeable underdog or vulnerable character and have the heel attack them. The crowd believes that the heel is a bully who deserves his comeuppance. Then, out of the locker room appears a handsome, well sculpted hero to the rescue. We now have established our “babyface” or good guy. The story goes on and on as the hero faces insurmountable odds until he finally overcomes. Sometimes babyfaces grow stale and the audience doesn’t cheer for them anymore, so characters will spice it up by turning heel, allowing someone else to now shine.
In real life, we play this drama out, especially online. If we can successfully identify ourselves or someone else as the vulnerable target, then anyone who isn’t anything but cordial to that target becomes the heel. Nobody in the crowd complains to the referee when the hero is bashing the heel’s face in with a steel chair, even though the hero is in violation of the supposed rules. Why would they? The heel deserves it! He pushed over the little person or insulted the hometown’s football team and needs his just desserts. When the babyface shows up, the crowd wants to see justice served. The biggest hero of the 80s was Hulk Hogan but if you watch him wrestle he totally fought like a heel. He constantly gouged eyes and hit people with weapons. It didn’t matter though because he had the crowd in the palm of his hands. His character was bulletproof.
Psyops is about making your own character bulletproof and manipulating the storyline so that your opponent is the heel. The rules and principles become less important after this is established. Character assassination has less to do with atomic wedgies in gym class and more to do with exiling your foe from the tribe. Turning the masses against them. Your weapons are the opinions and judgements of other people. Your defence is to build a fortified reputation by forming meaningful alliances and demonstrating your value to the collective.
Thank you for reading so far. Here is the outline of the manuscript for the book so you can keep track of where you are.
Introduction
Defence against Psyops
What are PsyOps?
What makes us marks?
The power of narratives
Who is behind it?
Kayfabe
Psychological Operations
Propaganda
Diversion of hatred
Character assassination (you are here)
Re-education
Cults
False flags/agent provocateur
Totalitarian regimes
Menticide
Defence
Principled insubordination
The Culture Wars
Ideological possession
Cancel Culture
Postmodernism
Profanity
MAGAstan vs. WOKEistan
Religious Zealotry
Heroes and villains
The Defence
The 21st Century Hero
The Responsibility of Freedom of Speech
Ridicule and Humour
Parallel Polis
Art and doubt
The Information Wars
Political Polarization
Corporate Media
Big Tech and the Post-Truth World
Noise vs Signal
“Woke”Journalism
Hate Hoaxes and victimhood
Collective ADHD
Advertisers
Defence
News/Media Diet
Critical Consuming
Rhetoric
The Slow burn
The Psychological Wars
Bullying
Gaslighting
Shame and isolation
Social contagion/Moral Panic
Safetyism
Social Media and human downgrading
The Meaning Crisis
Defence
Know Thyself
Be Wise
Stoicism
Psychological Immunity
Antifragility
Be Kind
Live Well
Conclusion