Obedience to authority
Many people wonder why these informants go along with this? Why would anyone go along with causing the suicide of their fellow citizens, or enacting cruelty on someones cats, dogs, kids, family, property etc? Why would you knowingly go along with a practice that many would consider to be evil?
The answer is obedience to authority. As long as an authority figure is giving the orders, experiments have shown that most people will go along with whatever is being ordered, even if those orders are to inflict pain on another human being.
Let's start with the Milgram experiments.
[quote]Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority.
As part of the experiment a stranger off the street is asked to shock an individual as part of a learning or behaviour modification experiment. The person doing the shocking is told that this will help the person to learn the answers to the question. The person being shocked has agreed to the experiment.
The person giving the shocks is giving a test shock of the lowest voltage to see what the pain is like. It's not pleasant. They are told that if the person fails to answer the question, they are to increase the voltage and to keep shocking the person till they get the answer correct.
The person giving the answers starts to get the questions wrong, they are asked to keep going by the person in authority. The person answering the questions, starts to scream out in pain, sometimes even screaming, my heart, my heart.
Many times the person giving the shock wants to stop what they are doing, but they are told don't pay it any mind we have to keep going, and so they are goaded on by the experimenter to the end of the experiment. 65% of those in the studied continued to the very end of the voltage metre.
Now imagine you are an average citizen, you are asked to become an Informant by the state, country that you love. At some point you realise that what you are doing is wrong and that people are being harmed. Let's say you come across a Gang Stalking website, and realise what you are taking part in. How can you stop?
First you are bound by a gag order, so you can't say anything. Second if you go to the police, local authorities, they are taking part, so you can't go there, human rights organizations, the same thing. Since becoming an Informant you realise that this is systemic and that the majority of your community is in some way taking part. What do you do where do you turn?
You can ask to not take part, but many people are afraid of being targeted themselves the same way, experiencing the same sort of harassment. There is a real cult like mentality about what is happening, even if most people do not identify it as such, so how would you get out, much less help the target?
In many cases they can't, and some of them are as trapped as we are. Either get the punishment or give the punishment. Not a great choice. This is not true for all of them, some are just really lowlifes and happy to go along with this, and would report anyone not following suit.
Within the system you can try to hint to the target about what is happening, try to help expose what is happening. Don't allow yourself to feel or become powerless, keep thinking, keep finding ways, try to keep feeling. If you let the stress of the situation overwhelm you, a part of you disassociates emotionally, and you became biddable, capable of not much but following orders.
How quickly can this shift come about, in a really short space of time. The Milgram experiment happened within an hour or two.
The next experiment happened over a few days.
The Stanford Prison Experiment.
The scary part about this, is that thy knew in advance that they were part of an experiment, they were paid for it, they agreed to it and everything. The experiment was suppose to last 2 weeks, but had to be ended after six days. One group of students were assigned to the role of prisoners, another to the role of guards.
[quote]As the experiment proceeded, several guards became progressively sadistic. Experimenters said that approximately one-third of the guards exhibited genuine sadistic tendencies. Interestingly, most of the guards were upset when the experiment concluded early.
Zimbardo argued that the prisoner participants had internalized their roles, based on the fact that some had stated that they would accept parole even with the attached condition of forfeiting all of their experiment-participation pay. Yet, when their parole applications were all denied, none of the prisoner participants quit the experiment. Zimbardo argued they had no reason for continued participation in the experiment after having lost all monetary compensation, yet they did, because they had internalised the prisoner identity, they thought themselves prisoners, hence, they stayed.[/quote]
The prisoners (students pretending to be prisoners) started to riot, the cops (students pretending to be cops) started to get brutal with them. Made them do all sorts of sick and sadistic things. Tried to get some to turn into snitches, one prisoner faked being crazy to get out, they turned on each other in some cases, and just fell in line with obeying authority, in most cases. The person conducting the experiment actually thought he was a warden, he got so caught up in the role.
[quote]In psychology, the results of the experiment are said to support situational attributions of behavior rather than dispositional attribution. In other words, it seemed the situation caused the participants' behavior, rather than anything inherent in their individual personalities. In this way, it is compatible with the results of the also-famous Milgram experiment, in which ordinary people fulfilled orders to administer what appeared to be damaging electric shocks to a confederate of the experimenter.[/quote]
The experiment at the time was used to help better understand the psychological changes that prisoners and their jailers go through. Later it was used to help explain the situation at Abu Ghraib with the prisoner abuses.
The Strip Search Prank Call
This experiment was anything but. Because a crank caller pretended to be an authority figure. A Police officer, average people were willing to carry out horrible actions on innocent people.
[quote]The strip search prank call scam was a series of incidents occurring for roughly a decade before 2004. These incidents involved a man calling a restaurant, claiming to be a police detective, and convincing managers to conduct strip-searches of female employees. Reports of over 70 such occurrences in 30 U.S. states finally led to the arrest and charging of David R. Stewart, a 37-year-old Florida corrections officer.[/quote]
These are a few of the incidents that occurred in the wake of these phone calls.
[quote]A call to a McDonald's restaurant in Hinesville, Georgia resulted in a janitor performing a body cavity search on a 19-year old cashier.A 17-year-old customer at a Taco Bell in Phoenix, Arizona was strip-searched by a manager receiving this kind of prank call.
On Nov. 30, 2000, the caller persuaded the manager at a McDonald's in Leitchfield, Kentucky, to remove her own clothes in front of a customer whom the caller said was suspected of sex offenses. The caller promised that undercover officers would burst in and arrest the customer the moment he attempted to molest her, said Detective Lt. Gary Troutman of the Leitchfield Police Department.
On May 29, 2002, a girl celebrating her 18th birthday -- in her first hour of her first day on the job at the McDonald's in Roosevelt, Iowa -- was forced to strip, jog naked and assume a series of embarrassing poses, all at the direction of a caller on the phone, according to court and news accounts.
On Jan. 26, 2003, according a police report in Davenport, Iowa, an assistant manager at an Applebee's Neighborhood Grill & Bar conducted a degrading 90-minute search of a waitress at the behest of a caller who said he was a regional manager -- even though the man had called collect, and despite the fact the assistant manager had read a company memo warning about hoax calls just a month earlier. He later told police he'd forgotten about the memo. [/quote]
The callers downfall came when he was able to get one of these sheeple to sexually assault a teenage girl over the phone. All the while giving the instructions. She complied, because she was scared, frightened and an authority figure was on the phone giving instructions.
[quote]The final prank call in this scheme was made to a McDonald's restaurant in Mount Washington, Kentucky on April 9, 2004. According to assistant manager Donna Summers, the caller identified himself as a policeman, 'Officer Scott', he described an employee whom he said was suspected of stealing a customer's purse. Summers called 18-year-old employee Louise Ogborn to her office and told her of the suspicion. Following the instructions of the caller, Summers ordered Ogborn first to empty her pockets, and finally to remove all her clothing except for an apron, in an effort to find the stolen items. Again following the caller's instructions, Summers had another employee watch Ogborn when she had to leave the office to check the restaurant. The first employee, 27 year old Jason Bradley, whom she asked to stay there refused to after he was on the phone with the caller, so she phoned her fiance Walter Nix, asking him to come in to 'help' with the situation. 
According to Ogborn, after Summers passed off the phone to Nix, he continued to do as the caller told, even as the caller's requests became progressively more bizarre. A security camera recorded Nix forcing Ogborn to remove her apron, the only article of clothing she was still wearing, and to assume degrading positions, such as standing on a chair and getting on all fours. When Ogborn refused to obey the caller's instructions, Nix hits the 90 lb Ogborn on the buttocks several times creating painful red welts, and at one point he does this for 10 minutes. At the caller's request, Nix then threatens to beat Ogborn again and forces Ogborn to kiss him and then perform oral sex on him. Ogborn says at the point of sexual assault she was scarred for life.
The tape showed that Summers re-entered the office several times and dismissed Ogborn's pleas for help, a statement which Summers denies.
When another employee was asked to take part and objected, Summers decided to call the store manager, whom the caller claimed to have on another phone line. She then discovered that the store manager had not spoken to any police officers, and that the call had been a hoax. A quick-thinking employee dialed *69 to determine that the caller had called from a supermarket pay phone in Panama City, Florida. Summers then called police, who arrested Nix and began an investigation to find the caller. [/quote]
The above scenario is really sick and hard to believe that something like that could happen, mush less that similar circumstances happened at least 70 times prior to this incident, but it's true.
Other events show us that people are willing to kill upon request, even innocent woman, children and the elderly, while others are not.
[quote]the My Lai massacre where the US army in Vietnam slaughtered 500 unarmed civilians, many women and children.
Some victims were sexually abused, beaten, tortured, maimed and mutilated.
Three U.S. servicemen who made an effort to halt the massacre and protect the wounded were sharply criticized by US Congressmen, received hate mail, death threats and mutilated animals on their doorsteps. Only 30 years after the event were their efforts honored.
American media first claimed 100 had been killed in a fierce fire fight. [/quote]
[quote]Charlie Company landed following a short artillery and helicopter gunship preparation. The soldiers found no enemy fighters in the village on the morning of March 16. Many suspected there were NLF troops in the village, hiding underground in the homes of their elderly parents or their wives. The U.S. soldiers, one platoon of which was led by Second Lieutenant William Calley, went in shooting at "suspected enemy position". After the first civilians were killed and wounded by the indiscriminate fire, the soldiers soon began attacking anything that moved, humans and animals alike, with firearms, grenades and bayonets. The scale of the massacre only spiraled as it progressed, the brutality increasing with each killing. BBC News described the scene:
“ Soldiers went berserk, gunning down unarmed men, women, children and babies. Families which huddled together for safety in huts or bunkers were shown no mercy. Those who emerged with hands held high were murdered. ... Elsewhere in the village, other atrocities were in progress. Women were gang raped; Vietnamese who had bowed to greet the Americans were beaten with fists and tortured, clubbed with rifle butts and stabbed with bayonets. Some victims were mutilated with the signature "C Company" carved into the chest. By late morning word had got back to higher authorities and a cease-fire was ordered. My Lai was in a state of carnage. Bodies were strewn through the village. ”
More victims at My Lai. Photo by Ronald L. HaeberleDozens of people were herded into an irrigation ditch and other locations and killed with automatic weapons. A large group of about 70 to 80 villagers, rounded up by the 1st Platoon in the center of the village, were killed personally by Calley and by soldiers he had ordered to fire. Calley also shot two other large groups of civilians with a weapon taken from a soldier who had refused to do any further killing.
Members of the 2nd Platoon killed at least 60-70 Vietnamese men, women, and children, as they swept through the northern half of My Lai 4 and through Binh Tay, a small subhamlet about 400 meters north of My Lai 4.
After the initial "sweeps" by the 1st and the 2nd Platoons, the 3rd Platoon was dispatched to deal with any "remaining resistance". They immediately began killing every still-living human and animal they could find, including shooting the Vietnamese who emerged from their hiding places, and finishing off the wounded found moaning in the heaps of bodies. The 3rd Platoon also rounded up and killed a group of 7 to 12 women and children.
Since Charlie Company had encountered no enemy opposition, 4th Battalion, 3rd Infantry Regiment, was moved into its landing zone between and attacked the subhamlet of My Khe 4, killing as many as 90 people. U.S. forces lost one man killed and seven wounded from mines and booby traps. During the next two days, both battalions were involved in additional burning and destruction of dwellings, and in the mistreatment of Vietnamese detainees.
Most of the soldiers had not participated in the crimes, but neither did they protest or complain to their superiors.[/quote]
At the end of the day what can really be said about these incidents are occurrences? Why are some people driven by a higher authority, a greater code of conduct than others? Why are some not willing to go along with this, when others just fall in line, or stand helplessly by and let these atrocities happen? Why do some decline to become Informants for the system while others just accept? Why do some just go along with injustice and corruption, while others turn away from all appearances of evil?Why do some question, while others don't?
There are a variety of reasons, many people are culturally engineered or programed to obey authority, many have never been in a similar situation before and their survival instinct is to comply, because everyone else is going along with it. Humans for the most part are social creatures and very few have the capacity to stand on their own, or be excluded from society, friends, family, neighbours and if the corruption, or atrocity is systemic, most will just fall in line
with what is happening, just like in Nazi Germany.