AI Says...
Betrayal, whether political, romantic, or professional, is often perceived as a sudden and brutal act. Yet, it generally results from a long psychological process where excessive expectations, built consciously or unconsciously, collide with a disappointing reality. This complex psychological mechanism is particularly evident in certain historical figures, such as the great British traitors who emerged from the elites of Oxford and Cambridge.
The Construction of Expectations: The Role of Elite Institutions
In early 20th-century England, the universities of Oxford and Cambridge shaped the country's political and intellectual elite. The young men who graduated from these institutions were prepared not only for prestigious careers but also to perpetuate the idea of a civilizing and superior British Empire. British intelligence services, notably MI6, recruited directly from these graduates, promising them noble and crucial missions for the nation's survival.
Among these recruits, figures such as Kim Philby, Guy Burgess, and Donald Maclean perfectly illustrate this phenomenon. They had been shaped by a worldview where the British Empire was a moral and political beacon. But when the Empire began to falter under the pressures of decolonization, this idealized vision crumbled.
Collision with Reality: The Beginning of Disillusionment
When high expectations collide with a disappointing reality—internal corruption, dubious foreign policies, colonial exploitation—a deep sense of betrayal arises within the individual. In the case of British spies, many realized that the values instilled in them were not upheld by the very institutions they served. This cognitive dissonance became unbearable for some, pushing them to seek a new ideal elsewhere, often in opposing ideologies such as Soviet communism.
Kim Philby, for example, did not wake up one morning with the idea of betraying his country. His betrayal was the result of a slow evolution, fueled by growing disenchantment with British foreign policy and a romanticized vision of socialism.
The Psychological Mechanism of Betrayal: From Anger to Rupture
Betrayal often stems from deep anger. This anger is not immediately directed inward but towards the system or person perceived as responsible for building unrealistic expectations. This dynamic is also found in romantic and professional betrayals.
Romantic betrayal: One partner invests unrealistic expectations in the relationship, idealizing their partner. When the reality of the other person is revealed—their flaws, their limits—a sense of disappointment and then resentment sets in. Romantic betrayal then becomes an unconscious form of revenge against the one who disappointed.
Professional betrayal: A dedicated and passionate employee may have high expectations of their company. If their efforts are not recognized, if promises made are not kept, resentment sets in, and the temptation to sabotage or leave for a competitor grows.
Betrayal: A Quest for Authenticity?
As paradoxical as it may seem, betrayal is often perceived by the traitor as an act of authenticity. Kim Philby believed he was serving a cause greater than that of the declining British Empire. Similarly, the unfaithful lover or the employee who abruptly leaves their position often justifies their act as a quest for truth and inner coherence.
Conclusion: A Universal Lesson
Betrayal, whether political, romantic, or professional, does not arise in a moral vacuum. It is the result of unrealistic expectations, brutal disillusionment, and long-repressed anger. The historical figures of British spies, as well as the more intimate stories of broken personal relationships, remind us that betrayal is above all a failure of communication between expectations and reality.
Understanding this mechanism not only allows us to better analyze the great traitors of history but also to prevent the small betrayals of everyday life that weaken human bonds.