 |
The Relevance of Erich Fromm to September 11, 2001 |
||
|
September 11 |
Karen Shore, Ph.D. |
||
 |
|
||
|
I look at the world and I notice it’s turning I still weep for the losses we sustained on September 11th. So many people -- too many to fathom. We who are New Yorkers have lost a part of our city. The Twin Towers seemed so solid, so permanent, so much a part of New York. The Pentagon… damaged and on fire. We lost our naiveté and our sense of safety. Suddenly, we are so very vulnerable. And very, very sad. How could this happen? No group is in a better position than those in the mental health field to understand the potential for destruction held by disturbed societies and disturbed psyches. We did not use what we know to inform our people and our government of the potential danger. From this point forward, we must be aware and we must use our understanding of mind and behavior to inform and to warn. In The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness (1973), Fromm wrote of malignant aggression, which includes sadism (the passion for unrestricted power over another sentient being) and necrophilia (the passion to destroy life and the attraction to all that is dead, decaying, and purely mechanical). Fromm wrote this book to analyze the nature and the conditions of malignant aggression, for he knew malignant aggression was a danger to man’s very existence as a species. Indeed, fearing that Saddam Hussein, bin Laden (if he is still alive), and others of their ilk have nuclear devices or massive amounts of war-grade biological and chemical weapons, we can envision the death of millions…and maybe of life itself. Fromm declared malignant aggression “evil,” and wanted us to know what evil looks like before it is too late. His analysis of destructiveness included an analysis of Adolf Hitler. He wanted us to know that there were many potential Hitlers. He wrote: “I believe that the majority of people do not have the intensely destructive character of a Hitler. But even if one would estimate that such persons formed 10% of our population, there are enough of them to be very dangerous if they attain influence and power. To be sure, not every destroyer would become a Hitler, because he would lack Hitler’s talents; he might only become an efficient member of the SS. But on the other hand, Hitler was no genius, and his talents were not unique. What was unique was the sociopolitical situation in which he could rise; there are probably hundreds of Hitlers among us who would come forth if their historical hour arrived” (pp. 480-481). The historical hour is here for many men in the Middle East. Malignant aggression in the form of sadism and necrophilia are described as “character-rooted passions” that develop as forms of relatedness. Fromm believed that we all have certain existential needs, such as the need to be related to others, to have an impact on others, to be devoted to something, and to achieve a sense of oneness and unity. He believed that we lack the instincts necessary to satisfy such needs and must, instead, develop automatic ways of reacting to these needs. The character-rooted passions are our own unique ways of satisfying these needs. Fromm wrote that if we grow up in a generally life-furthering environment (family and society), we would develop the biophilous passions of love, tenderness, justice, and the desire to grow things and to further life. If life-furthering solutions to our existential needs are frustrated, we are likely to develop the character-rooted passions of hate, greed, jealousy, envy, cruelty, narcissism, and destructiveness. Destructive relatedness might develop as the desire to control others (sadism) or the desire to tear things apart and bring living things to a stop (necrophilia). In particular, Fromm saw the necrophilous character as one whose passion it is to transform that which is alive into something unalive, to destroy for the sake of destruction, to tear apart living structures. Such a person believes that the only way to solve a problem or conflict is by force and violence, not by sympathetic effort, construction, or example. There is a marked interest in sickness in all its forms. He said that the necrophilous person is attracted to all that is dead, decayed, putrid, and sickly, and to all that is mechanical. In addition, he wrote that they are attracted to bad odors and “look as if they are always smelling a bad odor,” as if mankind itself was putrid to them. He emphasized that this was a characteristic of Adolf Hitler. Interestingly, the most prevalent picture of Bin Laden shows an expression that looks as if he had just smelled something foul. Fromm wrote that the character-rooted passions form the basis for man’s interest in life, his enthusiasm, and his excitement. They underlie dreams, religion, myth, drama, and all that makes life worth living. He believed that man seeks drama and excitement, and when he cannot get satisfaction on a higher level, he creates for himself the drama of destruction. He wrote that the passions are “man’s attempt to make sense out of life and to experience the optimum of intensity and strength he can (or believes he can) achieve under the given circumstances” (p. 30). Also, according to Erich Fromm, “if man cannot create anything or move anybody, if he cannot break out of the prison of his narcissism and isolation, he can escape the unbearable sense of vital impotence and nothingness only by affirming himself in the act of destruction of the life that he is unable to create” (p. 407). Little could provide more intensity than bringing down two of the tallest buildings in the world and crushing thousands of American bodies and lives. The need to have an impact was fulfilled through instilling incredible horror, pain, and fear in a show of power. Over the past decade or two, the increasing brazenness, destructiveness, and immensity of the statements and acts of Al-Quaeda and other terrorists and of the Taliban before September 11, 2001 should have informed us of the potential danger. The Taliban’s treatment of the people of Afghanistan, especially its women, became hideously destructive of freedom and life. The Taliban publicly murdered their own people and pushed many women, virtually forbidden to see the light of day or to make noise, to deep depression and suicide. The Taliban even forbade any art that portrayed any living being, human or animal. Artists had been hired to paint over images of people and animals in existing paintings. Of the suicide bombers and members of Al-Quaeda living in caves, I keep wondering: “Why aren’t these men home with their families?” What has made their lives such that they cannot focus on raising a new generation in peace? Is it that they feel a tremendous sense of impotence at home? And if so, what has made them feel so impotent that they are so committed to destroying us? Looking at the family dynamics of bin Laden and his followers and of the many suicide bombers would likely help us know something about what creates terrorists. For example, I wonder about Osama bin Laden’s life among his 50+ siblings. Had he found his way of making an impact by becoming the most infamous and destructive person on the face of the earth? In a brief story on Mohammed Atta, there were hints of a demanding father who criticized -- maybe mocked -- his son for being “too soft” emotionally. We should also study the social structure of the nations involved. We have begun to hear a bit about the sexual use of boys by men in Afghanistan. It is hard to imagine that this has no effect on these boys. Also, with wealthier men taking many wives, many other men have no opportunity to marry and raise children. What kind of life is left for them? There are undoubtedly also political and economic reasons that contribute to the anger and destructiveness of so many young men. Certainly, there are political and business leaders there who oppress their own people. Fromm said that necrophiles want to destroy everything and everybody, often even themselves; “their enemy is life itself” (p. 387). They may describe themselves as great liberators and builders and saviors, but in truth, they are using the social, economic, and political situation to feed their own needs. Usually, they bring massive death and destruction to their named enemies and, ultimately, to their own people. Understanding the personal and family dynamics of the terrorists and political leaders and studying the impact on the human psyche, heart, and soul of the social, political, and economic conditions of the area will provide some of the information the whole world needs to know in order to prevent future terrorism, war, and mass destruction. However, if we do not also look honestly and without defensiveness at the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and at our own political stands in the Middle East, we will likely miss important factors in this violence. Very basically, though it sounds simplistic, we need to ask how each side makes the other feel. Are we as innocent as we would like to believe, or have our businesses and governments been exploitative and arrogant in our dealings with the people of these areas? Have we supported oppressive regimes for our own advantage? Do we have our own corporate and governmental leaders who manifest destructive character-rooted passions? Have our actions made it easy for terrorist leaders to point to us as the enemy? Destructive and exploitive leaders in business and government damage the psyches of those subject to their power. They have the potential to thwart life, freedom, and growth. If our businesses and governments have contributed to the demoralization, poverty, and sense of impotence of the people, then we must make major changes in our corporate and governmental policies. There may be nothing wrong with seeking oil and doing other business in the Middle East, as long as we are respectful to the people of those nations. We know the cycle of mistreatment and hate, the cycle in which one who is deeply hurt grows up to hurt others. We also know the cycle of love, responsibility, and caring; the cycle in which one who is loved, cared for, and respected grows up to love, care for, and respect others. Those who study the field of mental health know how to describe dangerous persons, groups, and governments. We know how to describe the conditions needed for the development of the destructive character and of destructive societies. I hope our professions will use what they know to warn others when we see destructive people rising to power. We also know how to describe the conditions needed for the development of loving human beings and societies. I hope someday we will be able to effectively articulate how crucial it is that we create a world of loving, humane families, communities, and nations. In the meantime, we will, from time to time, weep for the loss of peace, the loss of safety, the loss of New York’s towers, and most deeply, for the loss of so many lives. |
|||