Thoughts in response to Blind Trust (2004), by V. Volkan, a theory of collective violence
by Thomas J. Scheff

This book provides what seems to me a broad explanation of the otherwise improbable situation we find ourselves in today's world. Dr. Volkan is the founder of a widely known conflict resolution center at the U. of Virginia, and an experienced negotiator in conflicts between nations. He is especially knowledgeable about the longstanding disputes between Turkish and Greek Cypriots, and between Serbs, Croatians, and Bosnian Moslems.

Dr. Volkan's theory of descent into collective violence has four steps. The first is what he calls the chosen trauma. The defeat of Serbs by Turks at the battle of Kosovo in 1396 was the battle cry in the 1990's for ethnic cleansing of the Moslems. Although the defeat occurred six hundred years ago, it seems to live on in the minds and hearts of Serbians.

The second step is the failure to mourn for the losses sustained in the chosen trauma. That is why the trauma lives on. The third step is the feeling of entitlement to revenge. Rather than facing the anguish of mourning and self-examination, a group can find distraction in self-righteous anger and aggression against a purported enemy.

The fourth and final step is what Dr. Volkan calls collective regression. Under the pressure of hidden emotions, a majority regresses to an early childhood mentality: mixtures of good and bad are unavailable. One's parents and leaders are all good, and others, enemies, are all bad. This mentality views points to violence as the only alternative, since we are completely good, the enemy is evil.

These steps are implied in two of Dr. Volkan's earlier books, The Need for Enemies (1988), and Bloodlines (1997). However, the new book provides a fifth element not made explicit in the previous work. The key to the failure to mourn is that the group has experienced the chosen trauma as a humiliation, they are ashamed of their defeat. To avoid feeling shame, a "us-them" world is constructed: we have nothing to be ashamed of, its those bastards who did this to us. This path leads down the slippery slope of revenge. Even if no enemy is at hand, one can be fabricated in order to avoid one's true feelings.

The addition of the fifth element, humiliation, is a step toward an integrated conception of emotion dynamics in protracted aggression. In my own study (1994) of the origins of the Franco-German wars (1870-1945), I proposed that both sides had masked their humiliation with anger toward the other side. Dr. Volkan's theory suggests that my study should have also explored the failure to mourn as a further causal element.

It now seems to me that both of our approaches also need to be expanded to include fear, along with grief and shame, as an element in collective violence. Recent studies of "terror management" (Pyszczynski, et al. 2003) suggest that fear is an important element in response to violence. Although this work is stated in cognitive terms, it implies fear as a key element. Indeed, Landau et al (2004) in introducing their study of the terror management underlying support of G.W. Bush, quote Becker (1971, p. 161) to this effect:

It is [fear] that makes people so willing to follow brash, strong-looking demagogues with tight jaws and loud voices.

In a forthcoming book, Randall Collins will explore the role of collective fear in generating violence of all kinds, both at the level of individuals and of groups.

At the moment, with the exception of Volkan's 2004 book, work on emotional components in generating and responding to violence tends to be compartmentalized. All of Volkan's many earlier studies focused on the failure to mourn (grief). My own work on conflict (1997) has focused on shame and humiliation. Lindner's work on violence (2002) has been even more specialized, considering only humiliation. The studies in terror management mentioned above have considered only "mortality salience," which implies the emotion of fear, as causal.

Each of these sets of studies makes a plausible case for the particular emotion that they emphasize. But it seems to me that the time has come to integrate these elements into a wider consideration of emotional/relational worlds. These worlds, although next to invisible in Western societies, surely plays an important part either in sustaining peace or war. They would seem to be particularly crucial for generating either public support or opposition to collective violence.

A pertinent example of the virtual invisibility of the emotional/relational world can be found within the social and behavioral sciences themselves. Most studies in the various disciplines elide around emotions and relationships in favor of individual cognition and behavior, even though all four areas are probably equally important for understanding human conduct. Both laypersons and experts know little about the emotional/relational world, at least as compared with their precise knowledge of individual cognition and behavior.

As more aspects are considered, it becomes easier to see how large scale social institutions might play a part. One example would be gender. If individuals and/or groups suppress grief, shame and/or fear, the vulnerable emotions, either violence or silent withdrawal (depression) is likely. Boys and men learn that vulnerable feelings are interpreted to be signs of weakness, but anger, even if faked, is seen as a sign of strength.

In Western cultures, at least, boys and men hide their vulnerable feelings, and act out anger instead. That is, young boys learn first in their families, and later, to a greater extent, in school, to disappear any and all of three vulnerable emotions they actually feel, in favor of acting out one emotion, anger, whether they feel it or not.

Since men usually dominate state and ethnic nationalism, the theory predicts a future filled with violence unless something can be done about understanding emotions.

The first step would be to devise ways of testing the general idea that numbing of emotions occurs, and that it effects behavior. To this point it is only a hypothesis. To the extent that it is supported, many other questions could be raised.

It would seem to be necessary to study these four emotions separately, and also their intereactions. Are there gradations of numbing, or is it all or nothing? Can numbing a single emotion, such as fear, lead to silence or violence, or does it take all three? Does the numbing of a single emotion spread to other emotions? As far as I know, none of these questions have been directly addressed in the literature on emotions.

Collective regression of the kind described by Volkan has less direct effect on the conduct of one's daily life than it does on large scale matters at a distance. But it completely incapacitates judgment with respect to these distant matters. One is the grip of a massive delusion. Might as well believe that the earth is flat, or that water flows uphill, with complete and unwavering confidence.

Volkan's theory seems to explain many elements in today's world. For example, the state of Israel has taken the Holocaust as its chosen trauma, and public support for Sharon's destructive policies toward the Palestinians is generated by the suppression of grief, shame and fear. In this country, we have 9/11 as our chosen trauma. The failure to collectively mourn our losses and to face our fear and shame has resulted in the completely gratuitous Iraq war. Hidden vulnerable emotions and all too obvious anger may be the matrix from which unnecessary violence arises.

A recent chance encounter at a memorial to our war dead illustrates some of the details of Volkan's theory. The father of a soldier who died in Iraq was showing me pictures of his son in uniform, a handsome young teenager. After viewing many photos, I began to cry. The father was surprised: "What's the matter?" I said: "I was wondering if the war in Iraq is worth the death of your son." Again he looked surprised. "But we had to do something." Why is that? I said. "9/11." I said "But Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11." "Well," the father said, " They're all Moslems." The responses of this father hints at various aspects of the us-them thinking that dominates today's world. We must find a way out before it is too late.

References
Landau, Mark, Sheldon Solomon, Jeff Greenberg, Florette Cohen, Tom Pyszczynski, Jamie Arndt, Claude H. Miller, Daniel M. Ogilvie, and Alison Cook 2004. Deliver us from Evil: The Effects of Mortality Salience and Reminders of 9/11 on Support for President George W. Bush Pers Soc Psychol Bull 30: 1136-1150

Lindner, Evelin (2002). Healing the cycles of humiliation: How to attend to the emotional aspects of "unsolvable" conflicts and the use of "humiliation entrepreneurship". In Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 8 (2), 125-139.

Pyszczynski, Tom, Sheldon Solomon, and Jeff Greenberg. 2003. In the Wake of 9/11 : The Psychology of Terror. WDC: APA.

Scheff, T. J. 1994 Bloody Revenge: Emotion, Nationalism and War. Westview Press (Reissued by iUniverse 2000)

Volkan, Vamik D. 1988. The need to have enemies and allies: from clinical practice to international relationships. Northvale, N.J.: J. Aronson, Inc.

_______________ 1997. Bloodlines: from ethnic pride to ethnic terrorism. New
York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux,.

______________ 2004. Blind trust: large groups and their leaders in times of crisis and terror. Charlottesville, Va.: Pitchstone.