Former Community – We Moved
🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.
Norwegian deputee steals sunglasses
Hello,
He's from the far-left. It could be any political party. However it's good to see that the virtue-signaling is hypocritical from any political party. He was the leader of the far-left party in Norway for 11 years and resigned from this position following this incident and pay a $250 fine for the theft ($107 glasses, smart move man).
Here is the video in French (did not find an equal quality in English):
He stole the glasses and then said when caught:
"I was watching sunglasses that I liked and put them on top of my luggage. I thought at a moment that they were my glasses and that I had forgotten to put them away. It's when I went to lunch that I realized that I discovered what I had in my pocket. I panicked and did not dare to come back."
"A guard then came and asked me to give the pair back. There was no room for excuses, one had to face the consequences. I'm really sorry for that."
Yeah, right.
So on the machiavellian side he failed from the start. If he got caught it would have paid $250. So if he wanted to be machiavellian he would have gone for something at least more than $250.
"I was watching sunglasses that I liked and put them on top of my luggage"
So far so good.
I thought at a moment that they were my glasses and that I had forgotten to put them away
Mmmh dodgy but still possible.
It's when I went to lunch that I realized that I discovered what I had in my pocket
Less and less plausible, plays the innocent but still ok could happen.
I panicked and did not dare to come back.
That's when he failed. Here he self-frames as a coward. He preferred to self-frame himself as a coward rather than a thief which is better, he's right. However, now he's either a liar and a thief or a coward. So going along his "honest mistake" thread right there he could have apologized: "I should have brought them back but I kept them (because I liked them). I thought: I never do it, so once is ok". And then people could have empathized: "who does not fuck up once in a while?"
"A guard then came and asked me to give the pair back."
So basically he got caught. It's not like the guard asked him. The guard caught him doing something illegal and demanded the sunglasses. Here he tries to frame it as a cordial request from "a guard" (like he just happened to be there). No dude, that's called a security agent and his job is to catch thieves like you. So it's not like he chose to. He has to and you are not supposed to steal.
There was no room for excuses
Well, that's an euphemism. Of course if you get caught with stolen sunglasses it's going to be hard to lie to a security agent who heard it all. "Oh I have sunglasses in my pocket? Wow. Thank you. I did not even like them in the first place. They did not fit right. Thanks I almost got home with sunglasses that did not fit. Thanks for your Service". So he tried to frame himself as starting to take responsibility for his actions which he did not. He got caught.
one had to face the consequences.
Here he thread-expands on him taking responsibility for his actions. It's also posturing as he had no choice. He tries to frame himself as high power but he was low power. He had to submit to the security agent.
I'm really sorry for that.
Sorry for what exactly? For lying? For stealing? For making an honest mistake? Since he's gaslighting with the whole "honest mistake" Spiel. Then it's difficult to make sense of the apology. If it's an honest mistake then there is no need to apologize. If you did steal or lie then own it from the start and the apology will sound real. So it's overall low assertiveness. He also did not say if it was a one-off if he regrets it or how he feels. So it totally sound like PR rather than owning it. So the whole communication gives a worse image of him than if he would have said:
"I tried the glasses and I liked them. I took them (useful and fair reframe from "stealing" for public image protection if sincere apology following) and I regret it. It was not to the standard I hold myself to everyday. It was an exception and I won't do it again. I regret it and I feel guilty and ashamed. I'm actually glad that I got caught because it helped me to reflect and change my behaviour. Even if it meant public shame and a fine. I deserved it. I ask (hope) the people of Norway to (will) forgive me and will trust me again in the realm of political affairs. I want to be clear that this is not how I behave usually and certainly not in political endeavours.
To be honest I don't think that stealing $107 sunglasses is that big of a crime. There are worse things. It's more an analysis of his character. As I said people in politics virtue-signal all the time. So like police or doctors they have to hold themselves to high moral standards for real. Otherwise if it's just a pretense, your normal behaviour will catch up with you. And when you fall you fall harder.
That's also why I think people who thrives to be honest are often times too hard on themselves (not talking about him). It's good to hold oneself to high standards. The thing is that many people do way worse than us. It's not about minimizing it's about relativizing which allows us to think: "Ok I fucked up this one time and won't do it again. What I can still see is that most of the times I do good.". Not as a moral licensing move but rather for not over-shame and not over-guilt. Appropriate shame and guilt.
Nice case study, John.
And much of your analysis is spot on.
From a purely Machiavellian point of view, he also failed because his story is not very credible.
And from a high-quality man point of view, as you say, he failed because he self-framed as a spineless coward.
Purely from a Mach point of view of saving some reputaiton, some other angles he could have taken:
- I took them because I didn't want to support X big corporation with my money: double down on the "far-left" ideal that sometimes go as far as justifying theft (even more justified if it's from a big "evil" corporation, and many far-left consider bigger corporations more evil than smaller ones)
- Maybe I took my values too far, then he could have tempered his stance like that, saying that capitalism must be reformed, and taking and stealing is not the right way to go. He could have even spinned that into a lesson for the most extremists
- I put them in my pocket with the idea of paying later, and then forgot: this is good because something like that may happen. For example, I often carry my own bag and put items there and think twice that I didn't leave anything unpaid to avoid potentially facing criminal consequences for a honest mistake.
It's a lot less credible for him because: he put it in his pocket (rather than a bag), the item is more expensive (so less likely to forget), and the item comes with a case which most shoppers want. But it may have been still "credible enough" for some
And from a higher-quality man, of course, the option of simply owning it, own his dark side to want take without giving, and own that he's been a bad example.
Thanks for your answer Lucio.
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on July 31, 2023, 12:37 pmNice case study, John.
And much of your analysis is spot on.
Thank you.
From a purely Machiavellian point of view, he also failed because his story is not very credible.
Definitely.
And from a high-quality man point of view, as you say, he failed because he self-framed as a spineless coward.
Purely from a Mach point of view of saving some reputaiton, some other angles he could have taken:
- I took them because I didn't want to support X big corporation with my money: double down on the "far-left" ideal that sometimes go as far as justifying theft (even more justified if it's from a big "evil" corporation, and many far-left consider bigger corporations more evil than smaller ones)
- Maybe I took my values too far, then he could have tempered his stance like that, saying that capitalism must be reformed, and taking and stealing is not the right way to go. He could have even spinned that into a lesson for the most extremists
Yes, that's the higher-road. Acknowledging this values but being self-critical about it. That's what my friend JB believes: "it's ok to steal from big corporations because they're not moral." (But I don't see how the supermarket falls into that...) It's a dangerous thinking though as it is a slippy road. And that's exactly what happened to me. So I prefer a strict moral code about stealing to avoid these situations. In French there's a saying: "he who steals an egg steals a beef" ("qui vole un oeuf vole un boeuf": it rhymes in French).
I did steal some stuff as a teenager (to be honest not much but I'm not proud of it. One thing I'm actually in the process of repairing 25 years later. So it does matter to me.) and I vowed to not do it again for those reasons (and being tortured by my conscience as well :P). So I just don't steal. Easier. It's like people who don't lie or don't cheat. Yes they miss on some things but they avoid a host of problems just by avoiding the behaviour. It's a helpful baseline behaviour to have. And then we can deal with the exceptions: "the cashier did a mistake in my favour and I did not tell him" or "I think the cashier did a mistake in my favour but I did not check". These are light grey areas and we are not going into the situation with the intention of taking without giving. It "happened" to us and we took advantage of it. Not the best behaviour but better than the former.
Yes you're right: he could have gained status within his own circle and extremists with defining a new norm: "yes we used to think that it's ok to steal from big corporations. But as I learned it is not. We must all hold ourselves to higher standards".
- I put them in my pocket with the idea of paying later, and then forgot: this is good because something like that may happen. For example, I often carry my own bag and put items there and think twice that I didn't leave anything unpaid to avoid potentially facing criminal consequences for a honest mistake.
It's a lot less credible for him because: he put it in his pocket (rather than a bag), the item is more expensive (so less likely to forget), and the item comes with a case which most shoppers want. But it may have been still "credible enough" for some
Definitely. This "honest mistake" answer is of better quality than the one he used.
And from a higher-quality man, of course, the option of simply owning it, own his dark side to want take without giving, and own that he's been a bad example.
Yep.
Hello,
another example of this kind of mentality (it’s ok to steal from the fat cats):
I love these guys they’re fun loving. They’re in their late twenties probably. So I would say “appropriate for the age” for whatever it means. They like to get in free at festivals. They’re very much in the “teenage boys” mentality. Live today cause you don’t know what tomorrow brings. Overall positive power aware and funny people.
However to me it’s not ok. It’s not a pro social behavior. It’s disrespectful to the people who did all this work and to the people who bought their tickets.
Oops I detect some hypocrisy in myself: I download movies on Torrents. Mmmh I’ll have to think about this one. I do moral licensing.
