This episode develops a cognitively grounded account of systemic judicial corruption through what it terms the “Folklore Effect”: a four-stage escalation dynamic in which institutional actors respond to error exposure with reputational panic, myth‑making about dissenters, and sustained suppression of disconfirming evidence.

Drawing on prospect theory and loss aversion, it argues that the prospect of reputational loss, when combined with moral‑hazard devices such as judicial immunity, predictably drives officials toward self‑protective misconduct that corrodes the rule of law.

The episode further examines an activist response strategy it labels “cognitive warfare,” in which a litigant deliberately provokes this pattern, documents institutional overreach through meticulous record‑keeping and broad elite‑level dissemination, and repurposes the resulting evidence to press for structural reforms, including enhanced accountability mechanisms, independent oversight, and judicial training on cognitive bias.

Situated within critical and progressive traditions, the analysis underscores both the diagnostic power and the ethical and empirical risks of treating courts as adversaries in a “war of the mind,” ultimately presenting the Folklore Effect as a provocative lens for understanding how seemingly isolated abuses reflect deeper psychological and institutional design failures.

00:00: Introduction to Institutional Corruption

01:00: Understanding Cognitive Warfare

02:40: The Power of Prospect Theory

03:40: The Folklore Effect Explained

05:00: Turning the Tables: Cognitive Warfare as Offence

06:30: The Tools of Cognitive Warfare

07:50: Aiming for Systemic Change