Update

humorwashing.md

@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ Examples:
 
 Analysis of **why it works and why it's done so often**:
 
-- Evil entity *A* wants to establish evil phenomenon *B*, which by its nature cannot be concealed (because it's something that naturaly HAS to be noticed, such as rising taxes etc.).
+- Evil entity *A* wants to establish evil phenomenon *B*, which by its nature cannot be concealed (because it's something that naturaly HAS to be noticed, such as rising taxes etc.). *B* may also be a confession to an evil already done by *A* or something similar.
 - It is clear the evil WILL be noticed, so rather than trying to fail at hiding *B* and risking people forming an independent opinion upon randomly stumbling upon *B*, *A* rather decides to expose people to *B* on his own terms, with an effort put on maximizing the chance that people will accept *B* if it is presented in a way they will likely approve of, so *A* will now for example reserve a seat on the latest brainwashing talk show on TV (or he'll make a youtube video, twitter post, write a book, pay for a billboard, ...) to deliver the news about *B* in a digestible form of a joke pill.
 - *A* now has a stage set and eyes of millions on him, he now clearly states to the masses: "HAHAHA, I am an EVIL entity (hahaha), so I will now start doing B, HAHAHA. Why? Because I'm evil (hahaha) like your favorite movie villain [parodies Joker], HAHAHA. [APPLAUSE PLEASE]".
 - Now most people probably either accept *B* or, in a worse case, wave it off, but they will not protest. This is so because:
@@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ Analysis of **why it works and why it's done so often**:
     - In addition the audience is distracted, not thinking about *B* so much, for example by analyzing the bad joke itself, pointing out how terrible it was, how they'd make a better one etc. The show is also staged to quickly go on and jump to another topic to not let people think for too long (and usually something quite interesting or even more 
 controversial will follow immediately to shift the attention away from *B*).
     - Even if some see it's a bit fishy, there is a very comfortable excuse offered to them, and many people actually take it: for some reasons many tell themselves: "Yeah he's evil like all rich people, but at least he has a sense of humor -- I am more fine with being raped by a company owned by a guy whom I like, so I accept this".
+    - Some unorinically think it's a joke in the sense that it's not true, just because it's so bizarre. If these people protest later on upon finding it indeed wasn't a joke, they'll be in a significant minority which can just be told to shut up because they had been told about *B* and they didn't protest.
     - Most people around are laughing so the rare few who spot the tactic AND don't want to accept it actually have no chance or courage.
     - If now, at this very point, people accept *B* (even with mild irritation) -- which they most likely will (and which is *A*'s goal) -- they psychologically form a perpetual approval of it and will most likely go on accepting it and NEVER again change their position -- next time hearing about *B* they'll just remember they already heard of it and approved (and this will go even as far as splitting the public to a minority opposing *B* and the majority being actively HOSTILE to them, actually starting to fully support *B*). It doesn't matter if the pill tasted a little bitter, only that most eventually took it. Most people decide their stance about a thing during their first encounter (possibly forming a [mental shortcut](shortcut_thinking.md)) and will then stick to this stance (if only out of laziness, but also for other reasons such as not wanting to contradict themselves).