I'm hesitant to mention this, but I can see I'm not the only one noticing it.
Many years ago, a psychiatrist named Yochelson and his younger Ph.D colleague Samenow wrote the first clinical overview of the psychological makeup of habitual criminals, after years of interviewing them. One of the (43, as I recall) traits that distinguished their thinking from that of others was what they termed the "victim stance" attitude.
I got more than familiar with this in the course of 23.5 years spent up close and personal with them in the state prison system. One, who we called "John Boy" had been "in a juvenile placement" (the system loves its euphemisms), where he managed to steal a car and make a break for the city he came from. Aged 13. At the bottom of the hill there was a school bus unloading primary school children. Rather than stopping, he blew the horn and ploughed through them, killing several and injuring others. Even years after this, in his mind, it had been the children's fault. After all, he'd warned them he was coming but they hadn't gotten out of his way. That he was incarcerated for this (and more) was, to him, an injustice. He was a victim of "the system."
Continuing in the then-and-now vein, one of my aunts had a Ph.D finished at an Ivy League university except for her dissertation when the Great Depression hit, forcing her to drop out and take a job teaching in a high school. Back then, "the system" was very definitely stacked against women in higher education, but she had taken it on, and succeeded. (I'm reminded of a coffee cup I used to see on women's desks that said, "In order for a woman to succeed, she has to be twice as good at her job than any man." And below that, in smaller type, "Fortunately this is not difficult"). She knew that "the system" would see to it that some time-serving male nonentity would always be the Superintendant of Schools, which galled her, but I NEVER heard her complain about it. That was the way things were, and life went on since there was no alternative.
My sister, on the other hand, dropped out of a Ph.D program in astronomy, also short of one only by her dissertation, because she realized there simply were no jobs at the end of that tunnel. So she parlayed her math chops into a job at a big-deal research institute, married a colleague there, picked up an engineering degree evenings and weekends, and flourished. Retired now, she recently flew to Northern Ireland for a week-long tutorial on genealogy (one of her hobbies), and then spent another week at a luxury resort in Central America for her best friend's daughter's wedding. But, to her, she and all "wimmen" are the victims of the grievous male patriarchy that "oppresses" them at every turn. I can't even talk with her because when questioned about the disconnect I can see between her doctrinaire snowflakeism and the reality of her situation, she explodes into a tirade at the top of her lungs (emotions are the new measure of truth).
IMO, there's obviously been a campaign going on for many years to fragment our culture. Women against men (men are pigs), children against their parents, racial animosity manufactured while being ignored, red states vs. blue states -- the goal being to so demoralize people that they have no backbone to resist, and are reduced to spending money in the fruitless search to find the happiness they should have had, or have been able to have had they not been psychologically incapacitated. Unhappy people spend their money trying to buy happiness.
To make a long story short, victim stance psychology (like the others Yochelson identified) is not unique to criminals -- everyone is liable to slip into it at times. But, again IMO, it should be identified as what it is, and confronted.