by Naresh Jotwani
Games of finance are designed on the basis of a shrewd understanding of human behaviour. A game succeeds if the intended victim is either made to play along with it, or induced to walk into a financial trap. Deception, pressure or both are usually needed to make the perpetrator succeed. Of course, by definition, the victim is at the losing end; that is the perpetrator’s goal.
Over this and the following posts, we attempt to understand how pressure of one type or another is utilized in a financial game, or in economic exploitation of any kind. Although deception is not discussed directly, it is often implied in the cases discussed, or does become explicit after the fact.
Pressure implies a relationship of dominance versus subservience between the two sides. The mechanisms by which a relationship of nominal equality turns into one of dominance versus subservience may fall into one or more of these categories: physical, intellectual, financial and emotional/social.
Consider two examples. A mugging on a lonely street, or extortion by a goon, involve applying a physical pressure tactic for economic gain; there is no need to deceive when ‘might is right’. A financial scam, on the other hand, combines intellectual deception with the target’s greed, which is an emotional factor.
Parents, teachers and coaches have at times to be firm with their children, students or trainees, as the case may be. These relationships includes a certain amount of dominance which aims to nurture useful qualities. Such instances of benevolent dominance are excluded from our discussion. We consider only the relationships which follow a cold, so-called ‘professional’ approach.
With that introduction, let us dig further into a few types of inter-personal relationships which involve dominance and subservience.
Stockholm syndrome is a condition in which hostages develop empathy towards their captors, rather than the antipathy which might be expected. The name comes from an attempted bank robbery in Stockholm. During the robbery, four people were held hostage, but they later refused to testify in court against their own captors. We must accept this syndrome as a human adaptation, which can occur when group of persons with opposing goals are thrown together under highly stressful circumstances.
A generalization of the syndrome can be attempted, whereby a victim of any form of domination or exploitation either develops – or feigns – empathy towards the perpetrator. Our aim is to discuss this phenomenon objectively, without any value judgement about those who are caught up in the all-too-human stressful experience. The generalization easily extends further to a person’s response to any authority figure.
Unless he or she has become literally mindless, the victim in such cases is simply adapting to specific difficult circumstances – as a hostage, a bullied person, or a harassed employee. The thing to note here, however, is that even the perpetrator is adapting to circumstances. While the victim is adapting for continued physical survival, the perpetrator is adapting to hold on to his or her position of profit, power and prestige.
The victim’s adaptation is at a level which anyone can understand; namely, at the level of bare necessities. For the perpetrator, the bully, physical survival is not the main issue. The perpetrator needs to hold on to prestige, power and self-worth. We may say that his or her needs are at a higher level in Maslow’s hierarchy, not merely the need to survive.
In general, a downward slide of a person from a higher level in Maslow’s hierarchy engenders intellectual gymnastics, rationalizations, half-truths and lies, the denial or obfuscation of truth. At the lowest level in the hierarchy, there is nothing to hide, and therefore the intellect does not struggle much; no rationalization or obfuscation is needed. Of course, in both the cases, a downward slide is painful to the person involved.
In Satyajit Ray’s film Jalsaghar, the ‘old money’ landlord tragically hurts his own precarious economic situation to relive his fondly remembered glory days, in trying to keep up with his ‘new money’ neighbour.
For another example, consider the recent western film Django Unchained. House slave Stephen is a loyal and trusted servant of the plantation owner Candie. Stephen’s adaptation to slavery – his survival mechanism – is to make himself the most loyal of slaves and a confidant of his cruel boss. The makeover is thorough. He does not play-act – which would be fatal, since Candie is as cunning and cruel as they come. Stephen is an example of Stockholm syndrome, totally crossing over to the tormentor’s side.
Now consider, in any large organization, the relationship between a manager and his immediate subordinates. A thoughtful subordinate will sometimes have a point of view which differs from that of the boss. Much understanding and effort are needed for a rational discussion to take place. This requires effort, whereas it is easier to simply go along with the boss. Many employees make ‘going along’ their sole adaptation technique, mastering the technique so well that it is difficult to tell where adaptation turns into apple-polishing.
Similar issues arise within every family, where several individual adaptations are in play at all times. The adaptations are sometimes at odds with one another, but in a functional family that averages out; no doubt the phrase ‘hen-pecked husband’ refers to a long-term adaptation. In a functional family, however, concern and tolerance make for overall well-being.
As the examples above show, issues of dominance, subservience and adaptation are difficult ones to grasp clearly even at a basic, inter-personal level. What happens, one may wonder, at societal levels? We shall look into those issues in subsequent posts.
We do not expect to find ‘the final answer’ – whatever that phrase means; indeed, it is not clear that there is such a thing. But certainly we hope the post prompts some reflection as to the basic issues which affect all our lives.
Acknowledgement: Blog co-editor R. Srinivasan’s insights, shared over a phone chat, proved extremely valuable in giving the final shape to this post.
seeker-of-root-causes 