In light of the recent terrorist activities in Paris, the Russian plane that was bombed, and countless shootings, stabbings, vehicular attacks, kidnappings, beheadings, suicide bombings, etc., one has to really wonder what is taking place in the minds of these killers. In the United States, we have had over 50 school shootings just this year alone. What is happening in the world?
As a graduate student in a clinical
mental health program, I have spent a lot of time pondering these questions of
late, and I have asked myself how much of the problems are related to the
mental health of these individual perpetrators. It seems like common sense that
something must be mentally wrong with all of them to commit such heinous
crimes, but there is something about labeling these criminals as mentally ill
that does a real disservice to the “normal” mentally ill patients out there.
The point being that there is
something worrisome about people making automatic associations between mental
illness and murder and terrorism. To be clear, the majority of people with
mental illness, whether or not they have depression, bipolar disorder,
post-traumatic stress disorder, or schizophrenia, for example, never harm
anyone. In fact, most of the time, they are the victims
of violence rather than the perpetrators. It is
a travesty that people who are already labeled and face terrible stigma must
then be lumped into the same group as those who commit such brutal and terrible
crimes against humanity.
That said, how do we understand the
minds of this particular brand of killers? We have spent years studying the
minds of psychopaths and serial killers in prison after capture, but how many
terrorists have been studied? Why does it matter, you might ask? Well, how do
we prevent future generations of terrorists if we don’t begin to figure out
what draws them into the life?
According to Sarah Kershaw of
the New York Times, since their capture from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,
former terrorists are now speaking out and going through de-radicalization
programs, allowing psychologists and psychiatrists to study them and collect
data that might help us understand if terrorism stems from mental illness.
It is agreed by most experts that
the pathway to terrorism often begins with propaganda, much like Hitler used.
The Internet and television channels operated by extremists are sometimes the
only media that impressionable children see and hear. Obviously, however, not
all who are exposed to this will grow up to strap bombs on themselves. Many who
do come from privileged backgrounds and different environments, never being
exposed to propaganda early in life at all. But this does not mean one can’t be
exposed to propaganda later. Whenever the exposure occurs, the mind of the
terrorist reacts with intrigue and sympathy for the cause through some form of
identification with it, if other important risk factors are also at play.
So while economic status appears to
be inconsequential, there is apparently a pathway to violence that does begin
very early in life. Children who grow up feeling victimized, alienated, or have
a strong belief that it is justified and morally acceptable to inflict harm on
another if the other person has perpetrated an unjust action, are likely to
start down the path to violence. Likewise, if a child is taught that his or her
particular ethnic or religious group is special or being victimized, he or she
may feel that the only way to find power is through violence. Victimization
and/or feeling that things are unfair or unjust are hallmark traits that lead
to violence.
Many terrorists are criminals first,
but not all criminals become terrorists, obviously. It takes some event to
accelerate radicalization. For example, a person may have experienced a loved
one being killed in a bombing or have been bullied in school unmercifully. At
some point, if some of the other risk factors mentioned above are present in
the individual, something snaps.
Dr.
Ervin Staub is a professor of psychology,
author, and expert on the topic of terrorism. In his research, he has concluded
that there are three types of terrorists. There are those who identify with the
suffering of a group, those who react to the experiences of their own group,
and lost souls who feel no purpose in life until they join and identify with
another group’s cause. These lost souls appear to be the ones heavily targeted
and recruited on the Internet.
Dr.
Clark McCauley, another professor of psychology,
author, and expert on terrorism, makes a clear distinction between terrorists
who act alone and those who join groups. The two seem to differ in their
psychopathology. While it is easier to think of terrorists as crazy, the truth
is that those who join groups are no more likely than the rest of the public to
suffer from any psychopathology prior to radicalizing Because of the fact that those
in the group rely so heavily upon one another, they would never want to trust a
“crazy” person with their lives and the goals of the group.
Lone bombers and lone gunmen,
however, do tend to suffer from mental illness. So it is important to break it
down. It is also important to understand that out of the three types of group
terrorists, the most likely to have mental problems are the lost souls
recruited on the Internet. These are more likely to fit the profile of the lone
gunmen, being more isolated, misfits of society, and misunderstood.
The sociopath who loves the gore of
watching beheadings, for example, can be lured into reading and learning more
about the movement. Many of these people are not even Muslim. But these
recruits make up a very small percentage of the overall numbers of people inside terrorist groups. We may hear about one homegrown terrorist who is mentally
ill and believe this one person represents the majority, when in fact, he or
she just receives all of the attention. Boston bomber, Tamerlan Tsarnaev,
is a great example of this.
Perhaps it is easier to imagine that
a person must be “crazy” in order to join a radical terrorist organization
because we can’t wrap our minds around the fact that a sane person is capable
of such atrocities. But when enough risk factors exist towards predisposing a person
towards violence, a normal person may not realize they are moving in that
direction. In fact, it is hypothesized that under the right conditions, any
normal or sane person could kill if they thought the reason was justified.
Most people have a sense of values,
and religion is only one reason a person feels a strong enough intensity
towards a cause as to go killing for it. According to Dr. McCauley, any group
that influences an individual can bring about a sense of moral judgment and
give a person a cause or a reason to fight for the group. Sometimes, violence
against the enemy is not a choice. Look at soldiers who are drafted into war,
as an example. They fight and kill for their cause. Some have killed innocent
women and children. Many have been seen as terrorists by their enemies, but are
hailed as heroes at home. This is not far from the way many jihadists are
viewed.
According to Dr. McCauley, the
strength of any group comes from the bond. In the case of terrorists, the
cohesion of the group is critical. It acts as a family. Nothing about it is
abnormal at all except for the intensity behind the cause that creates such
brutality. These groups have supporters to the cause, even from those who do
not agree with the violence or methods employed. These supporters are often
termed as “moderates.” In other words, they may be Muslim and believe that
people of the Middle East have been victimized by the United States and other
governments, but they do not agree with the violent acts committed by terrorists.
The problem is that society often
lumps moderates together with terrorist groups through stereotyping and
prejudice, which is, by the way, exactly what the terrorists want. By
stereotyping all Muslims as terrorists, for example, a hostile environment is
created for Muslims living in the United States. This encourages these Muslims
to experience victimization, which is the pathway to violence, so the
terrorists claim victory when this happens and know that it will help bring
many of these people to support their cause who otherwise might not have.
Many Americans try to make the
distinction between “radical” and “peace-loving” Muslims when speaking about
terrorists, but for the Muslims in the United States, they have no way to
identify themselves in public, so naturally, they are always suspect.
By the same token, when Americans
unleash a crusade against Muslims in the form of war, the terrorists begin the
jihad they hoped for all along. The terrorists are able to gain support around
the world where they otherwise could not. This occurs because people of the
world who also feel victimized, dominated, or humiliated by the United States
side with the terrorists and sympathize with their cause. The more the U.S.
wages war, the more the radicals show innocent people being killed all over
their controlled airwaves and cyberspace, and the angrier the people become.
Anger turns to hatred, and the vicious cycle perpetuates.
This is not to say in any way that
you cannot fight these people or shouldn’t go to war. It is just to explain the
dynamics of the psychological warfare being played. Terrorists are very cunning
and smart. They know exactly what they are doing in order to lure others into
war and pull others into fighting for their cause. They bring attention to
their cause, and for them, this is progress. For someone who felt belittled,
alone, and powerless prior to joining the movement, it feels justified. These
group terrorists may be cunning, manipulative, and willing to resort to brutal
and barbaric tactics, but they are not for the most part, mentally ill.
Dr. McCauley states that whether we
are fighting a war on drugs or fighting ISIS, it is the response to acts of
terrorism that unfortunately adds the deadly fuel to the fire that makes the
terrorists so dangerous. We must remember that terrorist groups do everything
they do in order to incite a reaction, which is why they behead people and film
the massacres, for example. They cannot walk peacefully into the office of a
government official, for example, and ask to be heard. They cannot commit some
small act of violence and cause a reaction. The only way to get the attention
they desire around the world is to do something barbaric and brutal. It works,
and it works well.
The intense reaction is the goal. By
being so brutal, they incite the enemy into battle, which makes them feel
powerful. They know when their enemy fights back, they have caused suffering or
pain to the masses, if anything, through fear alone. The more their enemy
fights, the more sympathy and support they receive from people who identify
with their cause. More and more join the group, and the cancer spreads.
Once a person is desensitized to
killing, there is no more shock. The process of radicalization makes it
impossible to turn back. To be a martyr is honorable, and dying for honor is
all that is sometimes left. Being extracted from family, having no more ties to
a community, and having no marital support or relationship makes it easier to
be motivated to become a suicide bomber. It is important to remember that these
people have been desperately longing for meaning in their lives and have
committed everything to the cause. In the end, many find that the only meaning comes from death.
This is the probably the most difficult aspect when it comes to trying to fight
them.
Many terrorists do, however, choose
to leave and stop the violence. Often times they feel disillusioned by promises
of excitement and glamor, only to find out that living in the group is nothing
like that. Some grow older, and their priorities shift. Sometimes, as the group
becomes more and more extreme, it becomes too much. Some sympathizers go into
the group believing in the cause but do not realize they will be killing women
and children or have any idea of the brutality of the killings until they
experience it in person. To some who have played violent video games their
entire lives, it is more of a game until the experience is realized.
So who becomes a
terrorist? It is difficult to profile them now because many people
do not fit the stereotype. More and more women are joining radical groups, for example. They Instagram and Tweet like loving
housewives and mothers, and turn around and commit heinous atrocities, even
against other women. But it is important to remember that women are often
victims in places like Afghanistan and elsewhere in the Middle East, so the
only way to become empowered is to join forces with the enemy. Remember the
pathway to terrorism often begins with victimization.
In all, it appears that most are
young, with the average age being anywhere from 24 to 27. This year, it is
estimated that one-third of all terrorists are under the age of 21. In the
United States, there is an ethnic mix of Arab and non-Arab. Some have criminal
records and prior convictions and arrests. At least 200 Americans have
tried to leave the country this year and join terrorist groups in Syria and
Iraq thanks to online propaganda, social media, and other media.
So before we make blanket remarks
about terrorists as sociopaths, we must understand what drives the behavior and
realize these people often seem as normal on the outside as anyone. They may
have held normal jobs at one time, interacted with others socially, or even
have spouses and children, etc. They may be young or old, male or female. They
may be misdirected or disillusioned, but the majority are not mentally ill by
any clinical standards. So we must understand the pathway to this way of life
and begin to recognize who is impressionable. We must look for those who have
lost hope and the misfits in need of belonging or fitting in with a group.
We must learn the risk factors that make certain people vulnerable and
protective factors that can keep them from going down this path.
For the others who act alone, there
is far more justification in looking at mental illness as the culprit,
although, as mentioned earlier, it is not always the case. Studies show that
less than 3% of US crimes involve those with mental illness, and fewer than 5%
of crimes involving guns are committed by
those diagnosed with mental illness. Of course, lone gunmen who are mentally
ill and carry out a mass shooting are the ones who become the poster children
for the media. People make claims that only the mentally ill use guns to kill
people, and that if guns were not sold to the mentally ill, there would be no
mass killings. The sad truth is that, while common sense dictates that those
with mental illness should not have guns, in the grand scheme of things, it
likely won’t change their ability to carry out their intent via some other
violent means if they really are crazy.
One thing is for certain. The victims
of terrorist activity all need mental healthcare and will likely need treatment
for years to follow. Because victimization is a pathway to violence, we need to
make sure victims are helped by professionals. As parents, we need to make sure
our own children are not desensitized to violence and criminal behavior and
that they are protected as much as possible from bullying and victimization,
especially inflicting it upon others. As far as how to handle terrorism in
Europe and abroad, we need to think carefully about our actions and the ways in
which we inadvertently breathe life into the movements through our actions.
While all terrorists may not be
sociopaths or psychopaths, it is clear that they are fighting a psychological
war. By manipulating us into changing our behaviors and living in fear, we play
right into their hands. The cancerous groups multiply while they divide and
isolate members of the larger society. As they draw us into battle, the
sympathizers come out in droves to support their cause, the cancer grows, and
the terrorists’ ideology metastasizes. When you are in psychological warfare,
the terrorists want to make YOU crazy by running you down mentally and
emotionally, and then knowing you will eventually fight back, relishing in the
fact that they have broken you down. When it comes to the psychological game,
the way to win is to refuse to live in fear. Cut the terrorists off at the
knees by disrupting their communications and monetary flow. When war is
necessary, know what you are up against…not a bunch of insane, socially inept,
unintelligent madmen, but people who desire to create the same hell for you as
they believe their people and cause endures.
It might do well to begin to look at
the collective mental health of a nation, rather than of the individuals
themselves. On a societal level, there is a pervasive sickness indeed. Where
people in societies and entire nations feel trapped, full of fear and hate,
experience continuous oppression, and when people have no hope for a brighter
future, the disease will grow. War may cause temporary disruption, but I am
afraid that when dealing with terrorism, killing more people does not cure the
larger problem. We used to be able to kill the enemy and they were
gone, but terrorism does not work that way. Now we shoot the enemy and it grows
new arms and legs. The answers are complex, but a psychological war requires an
in-depth psychological analysis of the leaders at the top and the individuals.
For now, I am surprised but convinced that most are free from diagnosable
mental illness, but as stated earlier, I am saddened by the amount of mental
illness they inflict onto others.
http://politichicks.com/2015/11/are-terrorists-mentally-insane/
No comments:
Post a Comment