10/20/02: Insanity
 

Very often I see people say that the sniper, or bin Laden, or Saddam Hussein must be <b>insane</b>. After all, they killed people! Anyone who would commit murder must be insane. Right? Let me just answer this with a resounding <i>no</i>. Insane does not mean, "to posess morals that are not my own". Murder is a moral issue, and you don't have to have a mental cross-wiring to be able to do it.

All people who say this are trying to do is discredit those they don't approve of in order to make themselves feel better. It's like saying that the president is a moron. You know he graduated from Harvard, so what the fuck are you talking about?

Morality is an invention of man, and breaking it does not require a miswiring of the brain.

I don't think Bush is a complete dummy, but he did have money. I'd be curious to see his GPAs, particularly on that MBA. :)

People as a whole though are such complex creatures. I firmly believe that some people are simply bad seeds from day one. They are sociopaths who are just mean by nature and cannot be "fixed." In other situations you have a unique combination of genetics and environment. Perhaps the two Columbine shooters weren't crazy by nature, but something in their environment caused their genetics to go haywire. (And I don't think it was KMFDM or Manson.)

So, you think some people are more genetically inclined towards violence?

I think so. It could have something to do with too much testosterone or a strange brain function. It could be incredibly obvious, or require some sort of reaction.

When John Wayne Gacy was executed, his family requested that scientists study his brain to see if they could figure out what caused him to be such a monster. At the time (15 years ago or so), they couldn't find anything. But with all the advances we have now, I wonder if there is something that would be noticeable.

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.... executed in '94, my man. Not 15 years ago.

I stand corrected. I must have been thinking of Ted Bundy (1989). The brain study was on Gacy though.

Usually, people who attribute 'insanity' as the cause for murderous actions or genocide of major historical figures, lack any education in psychology, history, or political science.

The average joe on the street will probably claim that the Hitler was a lunatic, and confirm that Saddam Hussein is a 'maniac', if he even knows the name of the former. Any reasonable study of history discards the 'Hitler the insane one' theory fairly rapidly, and future generations will probably do the same for Hussein.

The hunger for power and domination, coupled with the willingness to do everything necessary to cement one's position at the top is not insane. Unfortunately political motivations have led to the 'maniac' theory being thrown around all the time, coupled with the logical conclusions. ("He is coming after us next! Why not? He's insane!")

To further the point, the only times when Hitler, for instance, could have been considered insane was during the last year of his rule, when abuse of drugs led to a variety of mental problems. People who think Saddam was insane for invading Kuwait, for instance (and thus incuring the wrath of ths US), need to study US-Iraqi relations between 1984-1989, and the Iraqi geopolitical situation at the time. Iraq's leading cadres were absolutely baffled that the US would not approve of their actions.

I'm not even going to go into the 'his own people' ridiculousness, and outline what the PKK and Communist terrorists are.

Nonetheless, insanity is an easy excuse for those who don't know better.

X.

PS: I recommend Ian Kershaw's books on Hitler, as well as Alan Bullock's works on the same subject. (and Nazi Germany)