Who Will Be a Violent White Supremacist? Part 1: We Cannot Predict.

Global Information Society Watch 2014 – Communications surveillance in the digital age. This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Author: Association for Progressive Communications (APC)

by Alice LoCicero

It may come as unexpected bad news to many readers, but even “the experts” who propose what seem like logical programs to predict who will engage in violence against civilians for a political cause cannot do that. The idea has its appeal–predict who will become violent and intervene to prevent it before they get too close to acting. But, in fact, no one can predict, on an individual level, who will become violent in the future.

That is not to say that we don’t know anything—we know, for example, that men are more likely to engage in physical violence than women. But nothing we know can be relied upon to predict whether a specific individual—male or female⁠—will act violently in the future. 

There are multiple articles advocating programs (almost all of which reflect implicit or explicit bias against Muslim youth) intended to identify youth who are apt to become terrorists. Appropriately, these articles generally include a disclaimer saying there’s no consistent pattern to help us actually predict who might become a terrorist. That is, no one knows what the path to terrorism might look like; it’s impossible to predict, for any individuals, whether they will engage in violence against civilians for political purposes. 

Telling it like it is, here’s a quote from a 2017 article in the American Psychologist, by terrorism researcher John Horgan: “Though terrorist profiles exist in a broad sense, no meaningful (i.e., having predictive validity) psychological profile has been found either within or across groups.”

Given the lack of a solid scientific foundation for predicting the development of terrorists, many scientific and professional articles on the “terrorist threat” suggest that more research is needed–a reasonable suggestion. However, terrifyingly, others recommend programs and interventions based on conjectures, hypotheses, and theories about 1) who in the community might be helpful in predicting potential terrorists, and 2) how we might get them to inform the authorities of their suspicions about their friends, neighbors, and/or family members.

Just think about this: Here we have “professionals” making the outrageous assertion that, since neither researchers nor clinicians know who will become violent, we should get members of the community to inform on other members of the community, and assume that they’re correct.* 

Ask yourself: What are the implications of getting family, friends, and community members to inform police if they think someone may be on the path to committing terrorist acts? Some authors even suggest that teachers and/or care providers should report if they have some reason to think someone is at risk for developing into a terrorist. Some even have lists of risk factors. But the lists do not stand up to scientific inquiry.

It’s a House of Cards, and an expensive one at that. 

*Readers might wonder about the “duty to warn”—i.e., clinicians’ legal duty to inform potential victims and law enforcement if a patient threatens imminent harm to an identifiable person or persons. The differences here are: duty to warn involves 1) Imminent harm and 2) patient report. That is, if a patient–or anyone– tells a clinician that they’re about to do harm, the obligation is to believe them.  But the programs proposed for predicting future terrorists are not oriented to self-reported imminent actions, but to scrutinizing kids to guess which ones are likely to become terrorists in the future.  

Reprinted, lightly edited, from an article published Aug 30, 2019, on the Psychology Today website.

Alice LoCicero, Ph.D., is past president of the Society for the Study of Peace, Conflict and Violence, Division 48 of the APA.

  In Print: Creating Young Martyrs: Conditions That Make Dying in a Terrorist Attack Seem Like a Good Idea (Contemporary Psychology (Hardcover)) Online: Personal Website

Lighting Those Candles

Minot’s Ledge Lighthouse in a storm. In the public domain. Source: US Coast Guard.

By Kathie MM

Yesterday’s post by Lewis Randa, Director of the Peace Abbey, is a model letter for Donald Trump to consider sending to Chairman of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Kim Jung-un.  The post is also a beacon to all of us in these stormy, treacherous times.

In 1932, as newly-elected President Franklin Delano Roosevelt undertook to combat the greatest threat of the times—the Great Depression—he spoke those immortal words, “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.”

Nameless unreasoning fear abounds today, but much of our terror is justifiednot because there are hordes of terrorists whom people in power are nevertheless  eager to name, but because of the all-too-real threats to the sustainability of life on earth.

Fear—for example, of fascism, of the National Security Administration, of terrorists, of losing everything—is destructive of hearts and minds, depressing and debilitating, and demoralizing in countless ways.

One common response to de-moralizing fear is to strike out,  to hurt, to punish, to destroy the target of one’s fear.

But  recognize this: Hatred and murderous aggression rarely lead to sustainable fear-reducing outcomes.

On the other hand, making love instead of war may be too passive and self-focused to confront fear and make the world a better place.

So, here’s a better antidote to destructive fear and feelings of helplessness: Engaging in prosocial activism, engaging peace.

Specific prescription: Engage in letter writing campaigns of the sort recommended by Lewis Randa. Send his letter, with or without your own modifications, to Donald Trump.

Or, write your own letter to President Trump, with your own recommendations for avoiding nuclear war, for achieving peace with North Korea, for making the world a safer and more life-sustaining place for coming generations.

And even more promising: Start your own letter writing campaigns or join existing programs that seek positive solutions to problems such as gun violence, sexism and racism, world hunger and poverty, environmental destruction.  Make loving efforts for peace, not war.

For further inspiration, listen to a recording of John Hall’s Power .

You can read the lyrics here.

 

 

 

 

The Continuing Horror of 9/11

9/11 Memorial logo. Author: National September 11 Memorial & Museum. In the public domain.

Monday, September 11, 2017

By Barbara Kidney

The Continuing Horror of 9/11

Sixteen years later, and tragically, the horrific legacy of 9/11 lives on. Manhattan is my home town. My Mom, like her own Mom, had been born in Manhattan.  My Dad (the the Irish-American Brooklynite) worked on Maiden Lane, in lower Manhattan. He had been retired for many years at the time of 9/11, and I had left even more years ago.

At the time of the 9/11 attack, I was living in the Hudson Valley, with friends & neighbors working in Manhattan, including possibly my own husband, working as courier driver.  Eventually I found out that no one close to me had died in the attack, but the brother of an acquaintance (the brother had been a Manhattan chef) was killed, and the young adult son of a lovely, typically cheerful friend of mine, on his way to visit his fiancé across the country, was on board one of the planes that hit the towers.

People caught in the attack, NYC Transit workers, police, firefighters, EMT and other emergency personnel, exerted heroic efforts to prevent further deaths and to otherwise respond to the tragedy. As a native of NYC, I certainly was not at all surprised to hear of the various stories of sudden heroism by ordinary New Yorkers, who typically rise to such occasions with down-to-earth decency, humble and amazing courage, and competence.  Many of these have had their lives impeded and shortened by harm to their health, from the asbestos and toxins they breathed in, from the lack of protective equipment, and from our nation’s unique failure to provide adequate healthcare to all but the wealthy and the electeds.

And, I am proud to say, like so many of my fellow New Yorkers, including those who lost loved ones in the attack, the very last thing I wanted to have happen after 9/11 was for more civilians to be violently attacked and killed.  The last thing we wanted to have happen is for normal humans doing normal activities – people caring for their babies, caring for each other, caring for their pets, going to their jobs, taking their kids to school, growing crops (and flowers), creating art, healing the sick, making music, pursuing scientific enquiry, falling in love- the last thing we wanted after that hellish day, was to have some Americans choose to continue the work of the devil, and go around bombing people, who are just trying to live their lives in their own communities.

However, the very thing we most abhor, the killing of other humans, just trying to live their own human lives, was what those Americans with the most decision-making power chose to do.  After arranging for Bin Laden’s family in the U.S to be flown safely out of the US without questioning right after 9/11, W. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Rice, chose to violently kill, maim, torture Afghanis and Iraqis.

Had the governments of Afghanistan or Iraq declared war on us or even attacked us? No, they had not.  Which country, besides possibly our own, was most responsible, for 9/11?  Our dear friend, Saudi Arabia, to whom we give billions of US tax money for their weapons of terrorism – W. Bush, Obama, Trump…one thing these presidents all have in common is that. Many self-identified liberals and progressives opposed the invasion of Iraq during the W. Bush years, but then supported the US war on the Middle East during the Obama years.

According to well-respected human rights institutions such as Amnesty International, Reprieve, and Human Rights Watch, US military violence in the Middle East has killed hundreds of thousands of civilians, displaced millions, and under Obama, sneak drone murders of civilians in several countries has increased about tenfold compared to W., resulting in thousands of civilians being murdered, and Trump continues the dronings.  I use the word “murders” advisedly – bombing people with drones operated across the world, and then bombing the first-responders who come to render aid to the victims, is officially a crime according to international courts of justice, as well to anyone with the least exacting of moral compasses.

US presidents have much decision-making power, but it takes the many to empower their decisions. So many ways to enable US military terrorism.  Even though US wars and other military actions have been unjust and often illegal according to international standards, join the military or the National Guard, encourage young people to do so, and thank military members for their service (to Commanders-in-Chief with track records of violently sociopathic policy decisions).

Repeat the malarkey that the US military defends our freedoms (no, we do not have the freedom to kill people in other countries.  Are they invading us? No, we are invading them.  Are they threatening our Bill of Rights? No, we are doing that to ourselves, with, for example, the “Patriot” Acts, NSA, and Border Patrol allowed to do whatever they want to whomever they want, whenever). Repeat the malarkey that US military are all heroes.  Keep silent when others mouth the malarkey.  Never speak up about the blatant immorality of US declared and undeclared wars and the drone murders. Never join or support a peace group. Call violence “patriotic” and call failure to support mass murder “unpatriotic,” call those who try to protect their communities against US military violence “insurgents” like that’s a bad thing (hey, remember 1776 – who were the insurgents then?).  And when you hear others speak this way, be sure to remain silent. Never write a letter to the editor against US military decisions, never contact your electeds to protest US military actions.

Because fact is, those who can decide to initiate violent militaristic activities, would be utterly helpless to enact them, if it weren’t for all the myriad enablers making all those atrocities possible.

Special acknowledgement to all who remain silent about all that- the ongoing hellish legacy of 9/11 would be impossible without you. So, about three thousand people killed on 9/11/01, and since then, via military actions, the US has killed or otherwise adversely impacted well over a million people, who had, incidentally, nothing to do with 9/11.

To those who did have something to do with 9/11, we continue to give heaps of our tax money and weapons.  Can we stop yet?  Can we stop the hellish legacy of 9/11?   A reminder – in sharp contrast to the Democratic Party, as well as to the Republican Party, the Green Party accepts no corporate (think arms and drone manufacturers) funding, and the official political platform of the Green Party clearly supports peace.  Thou shalt not kill.  Is this really such a hard directive to follow? What will you do?

Barbara Kidney HVGP Co-Chair

Reprinted from Hudson Valley Green Party Blog, with permission of author.

Barbara Kidney, Ph.D., a counseling psychologist in private practice, resides in the Hudson Valley of NYS and does what she can to promote the welfare of Earth and Earthlings. She is a member of American Psychological Association’s Division 48, the Society for the Study of Peace, Conflict, and Violence, and a founding member of Hudson Valley Green Party and of the Drone Alert – Hudson Valley project 2012 – 2015.