Removing tax exemptions from people who make “too much money” is an example, I think.
I am going to respectfully disagree with you. I think the whole "sanction of the victim" refers to trying to manipulate the victim - in your example, the tax payer - into believing that the punishment being handed out is not only good, but deserved.
I think the concept is better displayed in what was done to the big banks. Several of them were strong armed into taking the TARP because the government was afraid that if the TARP ony went to a few, those banks would be stigmatized and investors would turn away.
Now the government is telling the banks that were forced to take the TARP, "you have to run your business the way we tell you... after all... you took the money".
See 11 and 13 - can we agree that that is a good example?
We have a local buisiness paper that I pick up sometimes.
Last week it was talking about the health of local banks...They were using not taking TARP money as advertising for their solidity.
This weeks article was about the staggering increase in FDIC insurance they were being forced to pay because of the trouble in other banks.
They weren’t part of the problem but they are paying for crimes of the looters.
I think the idea is somewhere between that and that the government would be satisfied if the victim acts as if the government premises were correct, even if he doesn't believe it himself. Remember the conversation between the police type and Rearden over his refusal to sell RM to the Science Institute. The cop seemed more concerned with public perception than with Hank's opinion.