In my two blogs entitled "Does society need victims?" I began to delve into the hidden reasons for the impulses that create attributions of guilt in those who are innocent.
The very quickly infamous C.R.B. check is an obvious example of a group drive to make a minority of people guilty and well represents as a mechanism for offloading guilt from the larger group onto people who become repositories for the guilt feelings that the group needs to shift elsewhere - that`s what victims are there for !!!!! It is, in affect, part of the witch hunt that is taking place in the name of protecting children and, as I have reasoned earlier, our suspicions ( for a witch hunt) are aroused by the very reasons issued to justify these checks.
In my second blog about society needing victims, I find that it is the sacrifice of the presumption of innocence that tells us that a compartmental conscience is activated in order to permit injustice. Of course, our common sense tells us that if rumours and unsubstantiated accusations are counted as grounds for reasonable suspicion (!!!!!!) in regard to the CRB, injustice is certain to take place. The thing that confirms this fact is that these heresay presentations are to be assessed by a panel behind closed doors: no court and no Jury. But our common sense needs an ally when we are up against the psychology of demonisation because those who pursue a demonisation drive are impervious to logic - their justifications tell us that!!!
We know that most cases of sexual abuse happen in the home or are committed by near family, therefore checking everybody who comes into contact with children outside the family is a red herring. We also know that paedophiles will find a way around any checks put in place. Further, a C.R.B check may be carried out on someone with no prior convictions or accusations and the said person may then only subsequently commit abuse. My last point here is to mention that many, if not most, children are silent about their abuse and as Brian Moore said recently on TV, the way to help all children and prevent abuse, is to ensure that all children have somewhere and someone to talk to should something untoward occur, not to focus on attacking the innocent.
But what damage is the CRB check going to do to individuals and to society as a whole? How much does it matter that people are regarded as guilty until proven innocent, if indeed they can ever prove their innocence? Does society suffer or change as a whole when there are demonisation drives and if it does, how does a guilt-shif-endeavour back-fire on the rest of us who have decent values ?
I think that, whilst the gains of guilt-shifting are about wellbeing and survival for the leaders of a group that is pursuing this need, the psychological/emotional deficit for those directly involved is of serious concern. You may be thinking that I have talked about the benefits of guilt-shifting, the way that dispelling guilt carries health benefits and material rewards, and that this is all to the good, surely?
Well, no, this is not the case, a survival of the fittest mentality, though, carrying society as a whole, actually has it`s pay-back against society too. Let`s look at this and see what happens to society when it follows its biological imperatives:
If we begin by taking this analysis into the small scale, we find that a bully in a family does pretty well.... they are largely guilt free and they continuously discharge the negative energy that they accrue by spilling out more bullying. Of course, discharging guilt helps them function more easily, but on a personal level they are damaging their relationships and the gains that come from these; they diminish their sensitivity and emotional capacity all the while, and this leaves them as a person who functions on a level that is desensitised from their actions and unable to access a more caring, nurturing self. They may well do quite well because of the guilt-shift they employ, put they are bereft of the finer, softer, deeper, higher value rewards of relationships that are not based upon threats and power and guilt-manipulation.They are inevitably surrounded, therefore, by their victims who also, due to suppressive unhappiness, function with an emotional deficit, with lives that are propelled, in their turn, by negative energy.
The same can be seen in the wider group: The more society indulges as a group in behaviour that is negative and suppressive, such as we are discussing, the more it prevents a society that is based upon positive traits of humanity and justice. Whilst the masses thrive in a harsh , unjust and brutal society, the downside is that the dominant people will be deficient in emotional facility. In a sense this can be represented in terms of a masculinisation of society as opposed to an adoption of feminine traits. We see in the UK in the last decades how government has acted wrongfully, mendaciously and unfairly and that it`s commensurate guilt has led to greater bullying behaviour. In other words, whether we are talking about bullying on a small scale or in large groups, the more guilt is incurred the more actions have to take place to send guilt to others.
The process spirals downwards, more and more guilt leads to more and more guilt shifting behaviour, more and more demonisation and more persecution. This is why on a scale demonstrated by governments, the more a government has to be ashamed about, the more it persecutes citizens in any way it can to off-load its guilt. Eventually, if unchecked, this pattern leads to a totalitarian state; along the way, there is an increase in suppression and control, surveillance and demonisation, which, of course, leads to more paranoia about the populace and more of the same practices. The result in terms of society, is that greater numbers of people have to become involved in guilt deflection and the group as a whole becomes more harsh, more desensitised to what it is doing to people, and less and less just.