In the world of business today, there are many who believe that honest dealings, effective management and personal integrity are key to a good business. According to this school of thought, only through productivity and innovation is new value achieved for the customer and the world at large. It’s enough to make any evil businessman cry himself all the way to the strip club.

Fortunately, there are a select few who set new trends and activities for the world of business, and not in the traditional sense either. Such individuals ensure that contracts are lengthy, buyers seek multiple venders and all major agreements are in writing. These individuals are not just skilled in business; they are skilled in a highly dedicated and technical skill: the art of screwing other people over.

Screwing other people over is a highly difficult and work-intensive craft. It takes great effort to focus one’s energy toward shifting the wealth of one person to another, usually to the individual driving the personal wealth transfer. While there are many normal business tools which can be (mis-) used for one’s ends, such as marketing, sales, operations, legal actions and various other practices, one consistent toolset for such individuals is dissemblance.

According to dictionary.com, to dissemble is to “conceal one’s true motives, thoughts, etc., by some pretense; speak or act hypocritically.” Thus, dissembling involves acting in one way, while actually having motivations to some other end. This should be distinguished from lying, which is to intentionally convey a falsity or falsehood. In this case, the deceiver is actually misleading the individual or individuals, being deceived through verbal “sleight of hand” and through obfuscation.

An example of dissembling is equivocation. An equivocation is a vague, or contradictory, statement intended to obfuscate one’s true motives or activities. This can be done to further conversation without contributing to it, to hide ignorance or to encourage the sharing of information without giving any by oneself.

For instance, during a highly scientific or otherwise jargon-laden conversation, one can use equivocations to avoid being put on the spot. For instance, a typical conversation could go like this:

“You know, I noticed that the comparison tests that we utilize seem to provide validity to the central limit theorem, so long as we have fairly decent sample sizes.” Possible equivocations include: “Hmmm, yes, I noticed that as well. Anyway…”So… how about them Beavers?” and so on. Of course, if a statement is especially tautological in nature, then an equivocation may be the only way to escape a very tedious and pointless conversation.

Of course, it is possible to engage in the concealment of relevant information or the minimization of information through tautological statements. According to dictionary.com, tautological can be defined as the “needless repetition of an idea, especially in words other than those of the immediate context, without imparting additional force or clearness, as in ‘widow woman.'”

Thus, it is possible to imply value or direct attention to the syntax of a statement, even if it does not mean anything. Examples include the discussion of obvious, added platitudes and misleading descriptions.

For instance, during a discussion, one may note, “It is a true fact that people get into car accidents.” This is redundant because a fact, if it is indeed a “factual” piece of information, it is very likely true. This is often used in pairing with another statement to give it additional strength, e.g., “It is a true fact that people get into car accidents, so perhaps you should consider the extended warranty for your vehicle.” Considering the fact that the car warranty will not function as insurance, the previous statement is misleading at best, and utterly deceptive at worst.

Of course, sometimes one may simply omit relevant information, rather than conceal or minimize it. For instance, one can promote a product or service, provide a contract for it and simply omit in conversation that the price can be changed at any time, the product itself is inferior to every other product available, and one makes serious commission selling such goods and services to fools who do not read contracts. This is a great tool if your witness to the contract is also a fool or “in on it,” which means that they benefit from the contract as well.

Once the contract is signed, it is binding, and if the person who accepts the terms cries foul, one can simply point to the contract and point out that they agreed to read the contract in full, understood what it meant, and would fulfill the contract. After that, it becomes cash out time, and the problem goes away – assuming that your customer does not find you in a dark alleyway.

The best part is, if you have a witness for the contract, you can always point out that someone else was there, and they were ready and able to sign that contract. In such a case, a “buwahaha” and a celebration are in order. So what if the customer is upset? It’s a tough world – get tough. Get smart.

As for the customer, it is always wise to be wary of any binding agreements, and to read and understand them thoroughly. Most importantly, it is wise to know when to walk away. Otherwise, you might not have the resources to do so later on.

Of course, for a seller, it is possible for a customer to be malevolence (or selfishness) personified. So let the seller beware as well. Buwahaha.

An example of dissembling is equivocation. An equivocation is a vague, or contradictory, statement intended to obfuscate one’s true motives or activities. This can be done to further conversation without contributing to it, to hide ignorance or to encourage the sharing of information without giving any by oneself.

For instance, during a highly scientific or otherwise jargon-laden conversation, one can use equivocations to avoid being put on the spot. For instance, a typical conversation could go like this:

“You know, I noticed that the comparison tests that we utilize seem to provide validity to the central limit theorem, so long as we have fairly decent sample sizes.” Possible equivocations include: “Hmmm, yes, I noticed that as well. Anyway…”So… how about them Beavers?” and so on. Of course, if a statement is especially tautological in nature, then an equivocation may be the only way to escape a very tedious and pointless conversation.

Of course, it is possible to engage in the concealment of relevant information or the minimization of information through tautological statements. According to dictionary.com, tautological can be defined as the “needless repetition of an idea, especially in words other than those of the immediate context, without imparting additional force or clearness, as in ‘widow woman.'”

Thus, it is possible to imply value or direct attention to the syntax of a statement, even if it does not mean anything. Examples include the discussion of obvious, added platitudes and misleading descriptions.

For instance, during a discussion, one may note, “It is a true fact that people get into car accidents.” This is redundant because a fact, if it is indeed a “factual” piece of information, it is very likely true. This is often used in pairing with another statement to give it additional strength, e.g., “It is a true fact that people get into car accidents, so perhaps you should consider the extended warranty for your vehicle.” Considering the fact that the car warranty will not function as insurance, the previous statement is misleading at best, and utterly deceptive at worst.

Of course, sometimes one may simply omit relevant information, rather than conceal or minimize it. For instance, one can promote a product or service, provide a contract for it and simply omit in conversation that the price can be changed at any time, the product itself is inferior to every other product available, and one makes serious commission selling such goods and services to fools who do not read contracts. This is a great tool if your witness to the contract is also a fool or “in on it,” which means that they benefit from the contract as well.

Once the contract is signed, it is binding, and if the person who accepts the terms cries foul, one can simply point to the contract and point out that they agreed to read the contract in full, understood what it meant, and would fulfill the contract. After that, it becomes cash out time, and the problem goes away – assuming that your customer does not find you in a dark alleyway.
The best part is, if you have a witness for the contract, you can always point out that someone else was there, and they were ready and able to sign that contract. In such a case, a “buwahaha” and a celebration are in order. So what if the customer is upset? It’s a tough world – get tough. Get smart.

As for the customer, it is always wise to be wary of any binding agreements, and to read and understand them thoroughly. Most importantly, it is wise to know when to walk away. Otherwise, you might not have the resources to do so later on.

Of course, for a seller, it is possible for a customer to be malevolence (or selfishness) personified. So let the seller beware as well. Buwahaha.