Plausible Deniability:
Disclaimer: Like the Political Science post this is not a political comment. Plausible Deniability is so deeply entrenched in the culture that it is a significant contributing factor in the prevalence and persistence of Age Discrimination...All forms of Discrimination and myriad other manufactured hardships and problems generally referred to as humanity's seeming limitless capacity for inhumane treatment of itself.
Okay...This one rivals Political Science for most oxymoronic. It basically says, "You have to trust us, so we're going to tell you from the start that we are going to engage in misconduct and lie about it so we don't go to jail or lose our shirts to Civil Litigation,". In fact, it is the fraudsters' brazen statement of power and an open admission that misconduct and dishonesty are an undocumented, yet integral part of an organization's culture. Additionally, there is the unspoken rationalization that it is essential for survival.
This is another one that can only exist in a meaningful way so it can be eradicated for the good of humanity and relegated to the history books (Oh my what our great [et. al.] grand kids must be gonna think of us!).
I suppose I should state, for the record, at this point that I am not some bitter old crank spouting vitriol. But a good-natured soul attempting to offer positive socio/cultural commentary about topics that are sometimes so absurdly toxic that there's no way to describe them accurately without revealing their inherent bitter irony. After-all, only the general boundaries of fate seem to be hard and fast. The details seem to be written by our own choices and actions.
This could turn out to be the point in history when our own technology became the element of The Natural Selection Process that selected against humanity and in favor of whatever came next. Or the point when humanity recognized and accepted a significant evolutionary rather than revolutionary change in direction was needed; and started it.
...Included a link to a well written description and a couple legal definitions.
A reasonably detailed article:
https://legaldictionary.net/plausible-deniability/
Plausible deniability refers to circumstances where a denial of responsibility or knowledge of wrongdoing can not be proved as true or untrue due to a lack of evidence proving the allegation. This term is often used in reference to situations where high ranking officials deny responsibility for or knowledge of wrongdoing by lower ranking officials. In those situations officials can "plausibly deny" an allegation even though it may be true.
It also refers to any act that leaves little or no evidence of wrongdoing or abuse.
First, let’s define the phrase. “Plausible deniability” usually involves high ranking members of a government or corporation not knowing about the activities of lower ranking members. Thus, if a lower ranking member commits a crime, the higher ranking member will claim “plausible deniability.” Put it another way, they’re saying they had no knowledge of the goings-on of the lower ranking member. Now, whether or not they actually know is one thing. Yet, proving what the higher ranking person knows is another.
Consequently, in day-to-day situations, “plausible deniability” involves demonstrating that little to no evidence exists to prove the defendant’s guilt. In other words, like we said above, it’s not about proving innocence. But it’s about questioning guilt. If not enough evidence exists to prove guilt, then innocence must be presumed.
