Anger
"It Takes More Than Ideology to Compel Violent Action"
On the drive to destroy and its rationalizations.
Posted December 3, 2015
“Anatomy is destiny” — Freud
(Title quote by criminal mind expert Mark Sageman)
Given that, according to criminal mind expert Dr. Adrian Raine, a biology of violence exists, and that in this NIH study violent criminals are 20–25 times more likely to be psychopaths, it stands to reason that the larger motivation of some terrorists and shooters might be the drive to harm. In other words, violence is not the means to an end but the end itself. If the compulsion to destroy is unconscious or physiological it can be rationalized by ideology. The stated reason may not be the true reason unbeknownst to the proclaimer. I once heard a religious leader say, some are brought into this world to build and others to destroy. Experts have identified other risk factors such as lack of education, alienation, need for camaraderie, unemployment, poverty, inability to rise in society, “relative deprivation” and identity issues. Like-minded people with common tendencies gravitate together and can form a group or a person may act alone.
Several conditions seed violence, but hardwiring may also be a significant factor, confirmed only by direct examination. Both in my practice and personal life, I have been exposed to people who use sadism to soothe inner tumult or satisfy hedonistic urges. It is as if they need to tear apart to feel whole, to humiliate to feel powerful, to maim to feel desirable. They are compelled by a psychological agitation that is only relieved by striking out. Those born with a modicum of conscience, compassion or humanity cannot fathom how one could possibly be so brazen or go so far, no matter what.
Many people suffer but they do not deal with it by destroying others. Moral high ground creates a predicament. Turning the other cheek may not be practical even if it protects integrity. A primitive, regressed mind may only comprehend intimidation or aggression whether it is psychological or physical. Then again, firing back can be dangerous as well as a departure from dignity. Machiavelli said, “I hold it to a sign of great prudence in men to refrain alike from threats and from the use of insulting language, for neither of these things deprives the enemy of his power, but the first puts him more on his guard, while the other intensifies his hatred of you and makes him more industrious in devising means to harm you.”
Turning it over and over, trying to find the logic of why violent perpetrators do what they do can be frustrating if you think about it rationally. If we can imagine ourselves committing similarly horrifying acts we might gain a bit of insight. Understanding that mental illness does not always imply a disorganized state is crucial. When we think of illness, we think of frailty, but some forms of impairment are the opposite. An abundance of aggressive drive, as described by Dr. Raine is a serious problem.
A high functioning person, full of rage, violence and intent needs constraints, not coddling. However, clinically speaking, one cannot take action unless they are a danger to themselves or others at the time they are examined. Even if you understand what they are capable of doing, you cannot do anything. Even if based on their past behavior, patterns, impulses and character, you can predict that someone will get hurt, without specifics, your hands are tied. We have all seen it happen. We need a way to deal with this.