Siðrof í íslensku samfélagi

Það er orðið augljóst fyrir mér að það hefur orðið alvarlegt siðrof í íslensku samfélagi. Áhrif þessa siðrofs eru hægt og rólega að koma í ljós þessa dagana. Enda er orðið augljóst að glæpamenn eru farnir að notfæra sér það ástand sem hefur skapast í málefnum lögregluyfirvalda á Íslandi. Þessi glæpabylgja hefur farið frekar hægt af stað síðustu mánuði, en innbrotum hversskonar hefur fjölgað og það sama má segja um skemmdarverk ýmisskonar.

Það sem virðist valda þessu siðrofi er það áfall sem íslenska þjóðin fékk í kjölfarið á bankahruninu. Það sem kom þá í ljós var eitthvað sem var þvert á það sem íslensku þjóðinni hafði verið sannfærð um á síðustu árum, en þessi sannfæring snérist um að íslensku þjóðinni hafði verið sannfærð um að hún væri best í öllu. Hvort sem það væri fjármál, fiskveiðar eða bara hvað sem íslenska þjóðin gerði. Það eru auðvitað gömul sannindi að ekki er hægt að viðhalda svona blekkingu til eilífðarnóns, eins og varð raunin með íslenskt samfélag.

Sannleikurinn er oft á tíðum erfiður og erfitt að sætta sig við hann. Reyndar bregðast margir við raunveruleikanum þegar hann skellur á þeim með þeim hætti sem sést í íslensku þjóðfélagi í dag. Með því að brjóta viðmið samfélagsins, og þá lögin á sama tíma. Við þessu ástandi verða stjórnvöld að bregðast nú þegar, enda er mjög slæmt að koma böndum á þetta ástand ef það fær að þróast í friði.

Glæpamenn eru alltaf til í þjóðfélögum, en það sem er að taka fótfestu á Íslandi er mikill fjöldi fólks fer að brjóta lögin viljandi. Vegna þess að því finnst brotið á því, hvort sem það er staðreyndin eða ekki.

Hérna eru nokkrar gerðir af afneitun.

Types of Denial

Denial of fact:
In this form of denial, someone avoids a fact by lying. This lying can take the form of an outright falsehood (commission), leaving out certain details to tailor a story (omission), or by falsely agreeing to something (assent, also referred to as „yessing“ behavior). Someone who is in denial of fact is typically using lies to avoid facts they think may be painful to themselves or others.

Denial of responsibility: This form of denial involves avoiding personal responsibility by blaming, minimizing or justifying. Blaming is a direct statement shifting culpability and may overlap with denial of fact. Minimizing is an attempt to make the effects or results of an action appear to be less harmful than they may actually be. Justifying is when someone takes a choice and attempts to make that choice look okay due to their perception of what is „right“ in a situation. Someone using denial of responsibility is usually attempting to avoid potential harm or pain by shifting attention away from themselves.

Denial of impact: Denial of impact involves a person’s avoiding thinking about or understanding the harms his or her behavior has caused to self or others. Doing this enables that person to avoid feeling a sense of guilt and it can prevent him or her from developing remorse or empathy for others. Denial of impact reduces or eliminates a sense of pain or harm from poor decisions.

Denial of awareness: This type of denial is best discussed by looking at the concept of state dependent learning[3]. People using this type of denial will avoid pain and harm by stating they were in a different state of awareness (such as alcohol or drug intoxication or on occasion mental health related). This type of denial often overlaps with denial of responsibility.

Denial of cycle: Many who use this type of denial will say things such as, „it just happened.“ Denial of cycle is where a person avoids looking at their decisions leading up to an event or does not consider their pattern of decision making and how harmful behavior is repeated. The pain and harm being avoided by this type of denial is more of the effort needed to change the focus from a singular event to looking at preceding events. It can also serve as a way to blame or justify behavior (see above).

Denial of denial: This can be a difficult concept for many people to identify with in themselves, but is a major barrier to changing hurtful behaviors. Denial of denial involves thoughts, actions and behaviors which bolster confidence that nothing needs to be changed in one’s personal behavior. This form of denial typically overlaps with all of the other forms of denial, but involves more self-delusion.

DARVO: An acronym to describe common strategy of abusers: Deny the abuse, then Attack the victim for attempting to make them accountable for their offense, thereby Reversing Victim and Offender. Psychologist Jennifer Freyd[4]. writes:

„…I have observed that actual abusers threaten, bully and make a nightmare for anyone who holds them accountable or asks them to change their abusive behavior. This attack, intended to chill and terrify, typically includes intimidation, overt and covert attacks on the whistle-blower’s credibility, and so on….. [T]he offender rapidly creates the impression that the whistle-blower is the wronged one, while the victim or concerned observer is depicted as the offender. Figure and ground are completely reversed… The offender is on the offense and the person attempting to hold the offender accountable is put on the defense.

Þetta er fengið héðan (wiki).