The following is my personal opinion.
Over the years, I have observed a phenomenon in various situations: I have dubbed it the Distance Rule. The rule is simple: the greater you can separate yourself from a person or group, the easier it is to justify or ignore harmful actions against that person or group.
The converse rule, which I call the Closeness Rule, also applies. The more one can relate to a person or group, the more difficult it is to justify harmful actions against that person or group.
There is a qualifier. These rules apply to individuals who have a moral center. Those with sociopathic tendencies will do whatever is in their best interest, as their ability to empathize with another person is absent.
Lastly, there is the phenomenon that I call Convenient Sociopathy, where it is so advantageous for an individual or organization to dehumanize an individual or group that they find a rationale to do so, often using the Distance Rule. Think of the corporation Enron, which regularly turned off electric power to parts of California, which caused harm to the most vulnerable while increasing the wealth of Enron’s shareholders.
Entire nations can use these rules, often employing propaganda to reach a goal. This tactic is always seen in war situations. During WWII, American propaganda portrayed both the Japanese and German citizens as bloodthirsty monsters, making it easier for US soldiers and the homefront to unite against them. Naturally, similar campaigns were launched against Americans in those countries.
Additionally, a systematic propaganda campaign was developed against non-Arians in Germany in the 1930s, and specific efforts by Germany, Italy, and Spain were developed to eliminate a particular minority population, the Jews.
Other groups were also targeted, from Eastern Europeans, to Romani, to gays, to those with physical, mental, and psychological issues. Creating an emotional distance between these groups and the general population allowed ordinary citizens to do the most horrific things to human beings.
It is easy to devise a method to separate one group from another. However, this process is more effective if the aggressor uses an easy-to-identify characteristic such as race, religion, economic status, education level, sexual orientation, or nationality. The aggressor’s goal is to gain power and control. That power can be expressed in privilege, wealth, or other forms of domination.
A common characteristic of serial killers is that they dehumanize their victims, using the Distance Rule to turn them into objects for gratification. This can be seen in predators who kill for sexual thrills, such as John Wayne Gacy and the BTK killer Dennis Rader.
The ability to distance from others to justify a behavior can be seen in less global ways. As a psychotherapist, I would see patients use the Distance Rule to create an emotional separation from a spouse when they enter into an affair relationship. At the same time, I would witness them using the Closeness Rule to idealize the affair partner as further justification for their actions. I have never heard a person active in an affair say something like, “My spouse is great, but I decided to cheat on them anyway.” Typically, an excuse is made focusing on their spouse’s flaws, lack of sexual response, inattentiveness, or whatever. Likewise, the AP is usually characterized in an ideal way as the one “who understands me,” the one “I can talk to,” or the one “who appreciates my sexual prowess.”
This Distance Rule is commonly seen in the corporate world and was promulgated by Jack Welch, the former CEO of General Electric. Before Mr. Welch, most large corporations’ strategies were for long-term, steady growth. Giving a workforce a sense of stability and rewarding them for their loyalty was part of that growth equation. Jack’s focus was very different. He saw a corporation as a profit-generating machine for stockholders and felt that the role of a corporation was to benefit those individuals. So be it if a job could be done less expensively in another country. A division that was not as profitable as another one should be closed and damn to the factory workers and communities that they lived in. Using that method, Jack made a lot of money for GE’s shareholders and himself.
GE survived as a corporation. However, this Distancing Rule sometimes destroys not only lives but also corporations. One example of that phenomenon is former Sunbeam CEO Albert Dunlap, known as Chainsaw Al for his business practices.
Sunbeam Corporation was a 100-year-old company that made small appliances under the Sunbeam and Oster brands. These were well-regarded US-made appliances. My mother used a Sunbeam Mixer daily from the 1950s until the 1970s, when she was gifted a Kitchenade Mixer. That original Sunbeam Mixmaster was a quality product. However, due to mismanagement, Sunbeam was less profitable than possible, so they brought in Chainsaw Al to improve the bottom line. Al fired around 50% of Sunbeam employees, closed down most of Sunbeam’s factories, and reduced their product line, destroying the lives of many. Robert Reich, then secretary of labor, noted, “There is no excuse for treating employees as if they are disposable pieces of equipment,” Chainsaw Al promoted stock options, which meant that any profit for Sunbeam shareholders would also benefit him. He was incentivized to do whatever it took to inflate Sunbeam’s stock, and that is precisely what he did, using fraudulent and illegal tactics that resulted in Sunbeam filing bankruptcy in 2001. Al left the corporate world with millions in his pockets despite paying off federal fines and penalties for his illegal practices. His fines were a small price to pay. Sunbeam was sold several times to larger entities, and Newell Brands now owns it. You can still find Sunbeam-branded products, including a crap version of the Mixmaster, which is now manufactured in China. No one aspires to have a new Mixmaster as the once legendary product has fallen far from grace.
The top 1% of income earners are those so isolated from the general population that the populace can become an object to achieve further gain rather than human beings with lives, families, and aspirations.
I know of a university student who was given an internship at Amazon. She was treated well in that temporary position, but she was appalled that workers were treated like machines. For instance, lower-level workers were written up if they ever sat down. Can you imagine?
Educated professionals can also be treated like commodities. For decades, we have been told that the secret to success was to become educated. Universities grew and prospered as US tuition reached stratospheric proportions. Students studied complex STEM disciplines like engineering and computer science with the promise of a secure and financially stable life. Currently, many of these individuals can’t find jobs or have been laid off as they try to cope with massive student debt, excessive mortgages, and rising inflation.
A particularly heinous practice in the US has been incentivizing shareholder profits in health care. Let me first say this clearly: there is no justification to murder another person. However, I can understand the anger and rage placed on corporations that enrich themselves by acting as the unnecessary middleman in an industry that is supposed to help people and not cause harm.
We have been sold a bill of goods that says our health system is the best in the world; it is not. Did you know that citizens in 48 other countries, including Costa Rica and Albania, have greater longevity than in the US? Did you know that many citizens in countries with universal health care are happy with it and can’t imagine the healthcare shenanigans that happen in the US? Did you know that medical debt is the number one reason for bankruptcy in the US? Did you know all developed countries except the US have healthcare for all? It is accepted as a benefit of an enlightened society, just like free education, fire departments, and public libraries. No one says, “I don’t want my kids to learn how to read and write because it will turn our country into a socialist state!”
Many attempts have been made to establish universal health care in the US starting in the 1800s, including efforts from Presidents Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and Harry Truman. Are you aware that beyond profit interests, one reason for this not happening was racism? Efforts for universal healthcare in the US started after the Civil War, but they were shot down by politicians, mainly from the South, as universal healthcare would have to include blacks. White legislators noted, “Free assistance of any kind would breed dependence, and when that came to black infirmity (Ed note: sickness), hard labor is a better salve than white medicine.” This should not be shocking as blacks have been excluded from many social reforms. Large numbers of blacks were excluded from the 1935 Social Security Act, and structural discrimination limited black’s access to the GI Bill.
Private health insurance became a popular perk used by companies to entice workers during WWII when wages were frozen. This perk became a factor in amplifying the health insurance industry.
Somehow, PR has made us believe that healthcare isn’t a right but a privilege. To that end, 27 million US citizens are uninsured despite programs like Medicaid and the Affordable Health Care Act. This impacts all of us and our economy and is often the case due to governmental barriers at the state level.
Traditional Medicare is a government-run healthcare program that its users generally like. Its administrative costs are 10 times less than private health insurance programs like Medicare Advantage. Traditional Medicare has a near-zero denial rate for accepted procedures. Lastly, its network of hospitals and doctors is vastly more expansive than any Medicare Advantage program. Medicare Advantage subscribers often give up traditional Medicare and sign up with a private insurance company because they are promised trivial perks. Getting free stuff sounds terrific until you have a significant and expensive need and your Advantage program denies or delays approval.
Regular private health insurance also practices these tactics. A loved one of mine had a spinal fusion, and we were told that she would be in the hospital for 4-5 days due to the complexity of the procedure. After 24 hours, the insurance company was pushing for discharge, and despite my efforts, my loved one was discharged at 36 hours. My loved one wasn’t making sense, could barely stand, and was in terrific pain. We had to provide complete nursing care at home for many days. Thankfully, I’m retired and have the knowledge and family support to take on that role. How many others don’t have those resources?
Medicare Advantage programs are under government investigation for fraudulent billing practices and denial of claims. It has been proven that Medicare Advantage offers a lower quality of care while costing the government more than traditional Medicare. So why are seniors always being pushed to go with an Advantage program? Well, there is a reason that insurance companies spent over $117,000,00.00 in campaign contributions and lobbying efforts in 2024. We already have government health insurance in conventional Medicare, and it works quite well, but it doesn’t make a profit for shareholders and CEOs.
By using the Distance Rule, insurance clients become objects to be manipulated to increase profits for shareholders and employees of the company. The recent tragedy of the murder of the CEO of United Health Care brought to the forefront the level of corruption in the industry. Yes, that CEO was being investigated for insider trading. Yes, he made 10 million dollars in his last year’s salary. Yes, he illegally sold 15 million dollars of UHC stocks when he knew the stock was about to tank due to an FTC investigation. That is horrible, but nothing compared to a 32% denial of claims by UHC. That means almost one-third of requests from mammograms to life-saving surgeries were denied. Those denials were made by a computer program, not a medical expert, and that software is reported to be wrong 90% of the time! Consider the consequences and damage to our society by turning human beings into objects that can be manipulated to gain corporate profit.
You may think insurance company denials are based on preventing evil doctors from performing unnecessary procedures, but that is not true. Some of the most significant legal investigations involving health care are due to insurance companies’ fraudulent billing of Medicare/Medicaid. Additionally, many doctors have stories of insurance companies denying payment even after getting pre-approved for a procedure. When insurance companies do pay, they can delay payment for months, causing hardship for practices with large overheads . Many rural and less endowed hospitals have been forced to close because of these and other practices, leaving entire communities without health care.
Insurance companies know that only about 0.2% of denials are ever appealed. Clients may not know that they have that right to appeal or may not have the psychological energy to launch such a process during their health crisis. Recently, our family had to face an insurance denial. A loved one was diagnosed with a rare and life-threatening condition that was so complicated that it required traveling to a university hospital. A very long, complex, and potentially dangerous operation needed to be performed, and the university hospital got pre-approval for the procedure from the insurance company. The operation took over 7.5 hours and involved a team of the hospital’s top doctors, including department chairs. Yet, 6 months after the operation, we received a bill for thousands of dollars as the insurance company denied a PART of the operation. I’m a physician; how do you deny PART of a pre-approved operation for a life-threatening condition? That makes little sense. I did appeal the decision and was rejected twice by the insurance company. I eventually filed a complaint with my state’s insurance commission before the charges were reversed. If only 0.2% appeal an insurance denial, how many of those 0.2% also know you can file a complaint to a regulatory commission? Likely, not many. Bonus for the insurance company.
In our modern society, individuals are becoming more isolated from each other. People work from home, friends connect via text messages, and groups isolate themselves due to their ever-widening economic status. All of this makes it easier to apply the Distance Rule.
I live in an affluent community. I see entire families dining at expensive restaurants on weekdays. It is a place where people walk down pristine walking paths sporting designer clothes. A place where many belong to a gym because they rarely do productive physical exercise. It is a wonderful place to live, and I’m very grateful that I am fortunate to have called my town my home. However, a short drive in almost any direction can take me to a different place. A place where poverty is evident. Where grocery stores don’t exist. Where schools are places of violence. A place where poverty drives crime, addiction, and fear. I generally avoid those places, as most of my neighbors do. We don’t have to think about the plight of those human beings; they are far away, making it easy to objectify them. Objects that we can blame and then ignore. “That’s not my problem. Look at how successful I am,” we say—ignoring the opportunities that we have had. That is how things work in our society. If it doesn’t directly impact the individual, it is ignored. However, as we continue to distance ourselves from others on all levels, the result is that we will also eventually suffer.
I was raised in a working-class neighborhood but managed to attend one of the country’s best medical schools. Everyone who works hard enough can do the same, right? Wrong. I had many advantages in my favor. I lived in a stable home and never worried that we would be evicted. There was always food on the table. Both sides of my family are academically oriented. My parents strongly emphasized the importance of education. I didn’t have the advantages of some, but I had many more benefits than many. This enabled me to use my only gift, my ability to think, to my advantage. Would that be the case if I was always hungry or afraid to go to school because I could be shot? I don’t think so.
Yet, it is still easy for me to objectify others using the Distance Rule. I have to actively put myself in the shoes of others. I have conservative friends and family, and I make an effort to understand their positions. I have working-class friends whose reality differs from mine, and I try to put myself in their shoes. When I drive through a poor neighborhood, I try to comprehend those people’s obstacles. When dealing with a persecuted minority, I imagine what their life must be like on a day-to-day basis.
Recently, I have had someone I know come out as trans. She possesses the courage and resolve that few, including myself, have. However, as a minority, she will suffer from the Distance Rule. In my professional life, I have worked with trans people. They represent an extremely tiny percentage of the population. Their wish is simple; they want to have freedom to live their life and to be left alone. There is NO evidence that they want to convert others to their position or that they get off from entering a bathroom. They just don’t want to be persecuted. Yet, look at how easy it has been to use the Distance Rule to objectify them and make them into an object of hate. Why do this? If you want to control a group, find another vulnerable group they can fear and hate and then promise to protect the majority group from that imaginary threat. A method as old as time.
We live in a society where the distance between different groups grows daily. That distance may be measured in terms of physical distance, monetary distance, educational distance, belief distance, racial distance, sexual orientation distance, liberal vs conservative distance, and just about any other separation you can think of. Consider this quote from our Pledge of Allegiance, “One nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” Think of the power and wisdom of that statement. When we apply the Distance Rule, we negate this promise. In the short term, it makes our lives easier. In the short term, it allows others to manipulate us and makes some richer. But what about the long term? What about our country and its promise to treat all fairly? In a country that should be the greatest on earth, such separations make the rich richer and the poor poorer. This can only lead to eventual collapse and disaster. That is common sense. Did you know that the three wealthiest individuals in the US have more money than the lowest 50 percent of the population? Three individuals have more wealth than the combined worth of 167 million humans. Their distance from that population is unfathomable.
Government and industry leaders have employed the Distance Rule to split populations so they could manipulate them and extract power and wealth from them. Why do we buy such a ridiculous concept that hurts everyone except for a few at the top?
If you accept even ten percent of the premise of this post, it is incumbent on you to move from passive acceptance of the status quo to active pursuit of a better way. You need to reject the Distance Rule and embrace the Closeness Rule. You need to look at how we are all more similar than different. At the same time, it is imperative to accept those slight differences that we do have and not buy into the manipulation of others who use minor differences as weapons to separate us.
Find common similarities between you and someone different from you. Listen to their dreams and their life struggles. You don’t have to adopt their ideas; they don’t have to convert to yours. It is OK to be different. At the same time, open your mind, as you may find that some of your beliefs may change as you understand who they are as human beings. In turn, they may do likewise. Focus on the humanity of others. Immanuel Kant developed the Categorical Imperative in the late 1700s. The Golden Rule is as old as time. We know what we need to do, but we are manipulated to do otherwise.
A talking point from this last election was, “Are you better off than you were 4 years ago?” It was a powerful point and likely won the presidency. However, it was a manipulation because the statement should have been, “Are you better off than you were 40 years ago.” For most, the answer would have been “No.” But that reason is not because of the immigrants, or blacks, or trans people, or whatever. It is because wealth has steadily moved from the poor to the rich. That is the reality that the 1% doesn’t want you to know. They effectively used the Distance Rule to deflect blame onto vulnerable groups that can’t defend themselves. Remember, we are always stronger when we work together. We are weaker when we allow others to separate us into groups, as that weakness can be exploited to all our detriment.
Peace,
Mike
