Coming Full Circle: Crime And Terror

The tragic events at Virginia Tech were the work of a psychopath (that left untreated, developed into a full blown psychosis), to be sure. The question that must be addressed is whether or not the events of that horrible day was primarily an act of terror or a crime.

What motivated Cho Sueng Hui may be forever unknown with absolute certainty. That said, we can make educated assumptions based on his own and other similar behavior and based on the cultural and societal influences of our times.

Cho’s actions were not the result of his wanting to die. Rather, they were the result of his wanting to find a better life in the afterlife. His religious references and stated affinity with Jesus are indicative of just that. This is not unique. Palestinian suicide bombers are convinced they will attain a better life in the afterlife. They have been taught since childhood to believe that their ‘transition’ to that sacred afterlife is made easier by doing what they believe is a righteous act. In the case of the Palestinians, it is killing Jews. In the case of Cho, it was by killing those who engage in debauchery, unfeeling and undeserving ‘rich people,’ or anyone who who didn’t give him his due. He regarded his act as ‘Christian.’

In speaking of Cho Sueng Hui, Dr Helen’s analysis is clear:

Because he is often a loner, he has no circle of friends to correct his misinterpretations of other people’s intentions and behaviors. Because he looks at the world from a very egocentric point of view, he is unable to correctly perceive the effect of his behavior on other people. The emotion he feels is not everyday anger but profound and intense hatred of those who have allegedly demeaned or wronged him. His thinking is so faulty that he can justify assaultive behavior on the basis that he is the innocent victim…

In Cho’s case, his insularity causes the disconnect. In the case of the Palestinians (and much of the Arab world), the disconnect from reality is cultivated deliberately, by a society and power structure that would implode if that disconnect were rejected.

The individual that wishes to die, to ‘end it all,’ does so alone. He or she may be motivated by the perceptions of personal failure. He may be motivated by love- “If I die, my family will get the life insurance money they need,” or, “I can’t go on without him/her.”

This is very different from “I will fix problems that need to be fixed, and in doing so, I will be elevated to a higher religious/moral/social status.”

In an attempt to discern whether the events at Virginia Tech were an act of terror or a crime, we have to distinguish between the two. While it is true that all acts of terror are criminal, it is also true not all criminal acts are acts of terror.

There are many definitions of terror. We have addressed this before:

“Terrorism” is a description of a means, a method of deliberately attacking or threatening to attack civilian targets in order to achieve political goals. “Freedom fighting” is a description of an end, as a freedom fighter’s goal is national liberation. An individual could participate in “terrorism” and “freedom fighting” simultaneously, because one word describes means, while the other describes ends. To say that a Palestinian suicide bomber is not condemnable as a terrorist because the bomber’s cause is national liberation is to argue that the end justifies the means.”

The deliberate use of terror comes about as the result of the failure of eliciting a particular desired response in negotiation. In other words, terror has become an acceptable form of expression and pressure exerted when individuals, groups or ideologues don’t get their way. The deliberate use of terror is not birthed in ‘humiliation,’ or ‘desperation.’

Terror is strategic weapon, designed to inflict fear- and thus increase leverage in negotiations or bargaining. Terror isn’t always the world away we think it is. In our society, terror has been used by striking workers and by strike busting management, to put pressure on the ‘other side’ and to improve negotiating positions.

Of course, that isn’t to say all terror is the same.

There is an enormous difference between single issue terror (PETA, IRA, Basque ETA, etc) and global terror that believes it can threaten all of western civilization at will, and thus elicit concessions on our part. As we have seen over the last few decades, the beliefs and foundations of western societies, cultures and ideologies are being brought to a phony and concocted ‘altar of peace,’ to be offered as a sacrifice to those who might otherwise unleash the assault on our freedoms we would have to defend. Those terrorists know they will not destroy the west. What they can do is terrify the west and make us obsess over own security, day in and day out. They will be able to do that as long as there are no consequences for the nations, regimes and organizations that support that terror.

Therein lies the difference between the terror broadcast on our nightly news and the terror of Cho Sueng Hui. The perpetrator of the massacre at Virginia Tech didn’t want to bring down western culture or beliefs- he wanted to correct the injustices he perceived, not unlike striking coal miners, textile mill workers or steel workers at the turn of the century. His terror was motivated by his own perceived station on life.

In addition, the global terrorist is not discriminating in what he destroys. Any destruction will do. These wanton acts are indicative of other, more disturbing pathologies. The stated political, religious or ideological goals are irrelevant- power is perceived to be derived from violence, in whatever form it takes- and all such violence is referred to as ‘Islamic’ religious expression, thus anointing that violence with a certain kind of legitimacy, one we cannot deride because we are not Muslims (and thus have no right to intercede. This kind of thinking has allowed the slaughter in Sudan to go on for the past two decades and the continued inertia as FGM has become a reality for over 100 million women). The slaughter in Iraq is a perfect example of this. Does anyone really believe that the vicious and savage sectarian violence will subside after American and Coalition forces depart?

The response to state supported terror masquerading as religious expression, is very different that the effects of terror with religious overtones, only. In state state supported terror as religious expression, we see a kind of mass hysteria. Hate and destruction supplant and become more desirable than life and the opportunities and possibilities life has to offer.

Religion, once the cocoon of humility, self examination and the fountain from which we nourish the best that is within, has become a bastion of envy, hubris, narcissism and hate. The world is upended: murder and death supplant life. Freedom and goodness, the two highest expressions of man, are ground into the earth.

In this topsy turvey world, the persecutor must be the persecuted. Somehow, the behavior and destructive narcissistic expressions must be explained and thereby justified. The opposing views are washed away. The persecutor can be the persecuted, exercising sacred retribution, divine or political.

Dr Sanity noted, in Repression And The Mirror Of Insight, “Freud is reported to have said that the very act of entering into civilized society entails the repression of various desires, impulses and feelings.”

This is antithetical to the ideology that blesses terror. All cultures and societies must repress the urge to lash out at will, because it is part of the human condition that we are not equal.

Dr Sanity discusses what is healthy, within the framework of a healthy society:

The most psychologically healthy… are those those that allow us to transform the primitive instinctual energy of even the most destructive emotions into works of art or entertainment that give pleasure to others (sublimation and humor); or behavior that is socially beneficial (altruism, anticipation, suppression). People who achieve optimal psychological health are those who have come to satisfactory terms with their neurobiology. They are people who have learned to accept their anger, rage and other potentially deadly emotions and, instead of destructively acting out, repressing, denying or projecting; have creatively expressed those feelings in a way that improves life both for themselves and for others…

Insight is a wonderful thing. The power or act of seeing into a situation and apprehending the inner nature or motivation of one’s self–especially the why–can be extremely liberating… Only by being aware of these kind of hidden truths and inner motivations can a person gain control over them and correct the behavior that they generate.

Without the accepted conventions of a healthy culture and society, we can expect to see more Cho Sueng Hui’s.

We all carry some kind of baggage- our responsibilities, our home life and the influences of our childhood all contribute to the ‘load’ each of us bears. We also understand that we must constantly work at finding order from within chaos- and that means defining our reality, however painfu, because if we don’t, we will find ourselves weighted down again, very quickly. Without real insight, freedom from chaos soon becomes ethereal. Left untreated, earned dysfunctional behaviors and biases will reassert themselves- and sometimes, individuals that are overwhelmed and left to their own devices because we refused to deal with a problem (and called that refusal ‘caring’) will come back and bite us. We didn’t love them enough to care. The Emperor had no clothes (see also Dr Helen on deliberate ‘deinstitutionalization’)

The voices that call for or defend the policies of those who place violence over reason and demand chaos over order, are as dysfunctional as those for whom the ideologies of violence and chaos are a reality- and they are equally threatening to civilized society. Cho wasn’t created in a vacuum. If we give those that have embraced and acted upon their violent tendencies a free ride, it is no surprise that Cho Sueng Hui wasn’t even on the radar. How can a society that excuses violence and terror in others, deal with an individual that has yet to commit an act of violence? How are terrorists that blow up buses or restaurants or schools any different than Cho?

In Shrinkwrapped’s , Pity The Poor Anti Semite, certain analogies can be made to the terrorist and his targets.

The anti-Semite (read: terrorist- SC&A) necessarily defines himself as monumentally inferior to the Jew (read: his victim- SC&A)

This resides in the core of the anti-Semite and renders him permanently damaged and weakened. Only the aid of a being much greater than themselves, Allah, can save them from disaster. Short of such divine intervention, they are doomed to remain defeated. The Muslim nations of the world do not see it as within their abilities to compete in a world of high technology, higher education, competitive open economies; no, they look to nuclear weapons, only available to them by virtue of their Allah given oil money rather than by the sweat of their own brows, to bring them relief from the often imagined depredations of the now conflated Jewish/American demi-Gods.

For those who have the hubris to attempt to destroy the Gods, there are only two outcomes possible:

If they partially succeed, as the Nazis did, they imagine they have become Gods, intoxicated with their power; and, as with all who pretend to be Gods, they over-reach themselves and are inevitably destroyed. Only those with the egotism of the Malignant Narcissist would dare attack England, invade Russia, and antagonize the sleeping American giant, at the same time.

Conflict and confrontation with others and at times with ourselves, is inevitable. It is how we choose to manifest, manage, or not manifest and manage conflict, that comes closest to defining our relationship with our community, culture and society. It is also true while the definition of conflict may change, appropriately managing conflict appropriately remains unchanged.

In Cho Sueng Hui’s saw his glass half empty. The child of hard working immigrants obsessed over what he didn’t have- despite being afforded opportunities that many in this country can only dream of. His sister, a Princeton graduate, works for the State Department, in a position of authority that oversees Iraq reconstruction. In less than one generation, a child of modest means has come to represent this great nation and devote her efforts and talents into helping others.

It is also true that Cho Sueng Hui was in conflict with the world around him. He made a conscious choice, influenced by our culture, in how he would manage and manifest that conflict- and in how he would be perceived. This child of modest means was to find nurturing and support for his own victimhood. The unthinkable became an option.

He committed no crime. He committed an act of terror.