PROFOUND PSYCHOPATHOLOGY AND THE NORMATIVE STRUCTURES OF SOCIETY ARE NOT SEPARATE

I authored the piece below before the "Trump phenomenon" had come into being and taken hold. The ideas I developed were based primarily on my extensive research into Hitler and Nazism, with a little help from his friends, Lenin, Stalin and Mao. 

The central idea is that entire societies, not simply individuals, can be viewed from the perspective of delusion and psychosis. This point of view contradicts the paradigm of psychiatry, which claims that the concept of psychopathology applies only to individuals.

It also contradicts traditional ways in which historical narratives are written--whereby anything that occurs is conceived as normative--no matter who "mad" or "insane" the events may seem from an intuitive or human point of view.

With the Trump phenomenon, these perspectives  become obsolete: profound psychopathology and the "normal" structures of society may not be separate. No longer sufficient to scratch one's head and say "this is insane" or "this is crazy." A new paradigm--therefore a new world--is coming into being.

Richard Koenigsberg

____________________________________________________________________________________

Abstract: On the one hand, one might say that if certain forms of behavior occur with great frequency in politics—however bizarre, weird or destructive they may be—they are normal simply because they occur frequently. This would appear to be implicit in the nature of historical documentation: whatever occurs is, by definition, "normal" because it has occurred.

Or we may consider the possibility that profound psychopathology is contained within the political process. Perhaps politics is a domain characterized precisely by “madness.” 

Can entire groups be insane?

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV, 2000, cited in the “Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy”) defines a delusion as

  • False belief based on incorrect inference about external reality that is firmly sustained despite what almost everybody else believes and despite what constitutes incontrovertible and obvious proof or evidence to the contrary. The belief is not one ordinarily accepted by other members of the person’s culture or subculture.

Delusions are beliefs “held with great conviction in spite of little empirical support.” A delusion is a “false belief based on incorrect inferences about external reality that is firmly sustained.” A person is deluded when he hold a particular belief with a “degree of firmness utterly unwarranted by the evidence at hand.”

Hitler and the Nazis embraced a delusion about the Jews and Jewish power. They believed Jews were acting to destroy the German people and civilized world; they asserted that Jews were equivalent to bacteria or viruses; they claimed that “international Jewry” stood behind Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin, working to unite these leaders and their nations in a conspiracy to cause Germany to disintegrate (Herf, 2006).

The term “delusion” usually refers to a clinical syndrome associated with paranoid schizophrenia. How, then, are we to characterize a delusion that is widespread within a society? What can we say about delusions that are embraced by large numbers of people within a culture?

Collective Delusion

Although Nazi leaders such as Hitler, Himmler and Goebbels were deluded regarding  their beliefs about Jews, they were not psychotic. Indeed, according to the conventional psychiatric definition, these men could not be considered psychotic. In response to my essay on “Social Madness/Collective Delusion,” a Newsletter Subscriber commented that ‘Madness’ understood as mental illness — a psychotic break from reality —

does not apply in situations where a substantial portion of individuals from a given group share their beliefs, no matter how irrational or fantastic or bizarre those beliefs may seem. A common belief within a group becomes a norm, and as such, the act of believing is not abnormal. Therefore the postulate that Nazis were ‘mad’ or ‘insane’ does not apply.

In spite of this psychiatric definition, we can’t help but feel that — however “normative” their cultural beliefs or behavior — the Nazis’ ideas and actions were “mad.” Somehow, gassing people en masse, incinerating them in ovens (“the Jew goes out the chimney”), endlessly torturing and brutalizing Jews (before killing them) does not seem normal.

Yet we hesitate to apply the term abnormality to actions performed within the framework of politics and history. If the Nazis’ beliefs and behavior were mad or insane, how are we to characterize the Twentieth Century itself and the numerous episodes of revolution, war and genocide that resulted in the deaths of over 200 million people?

On the one hand, one might say that if certain forms of behavior occur with great frequency in history—however bizarre, weird or destructive they may be—they are normal simply because they have occurred so frequently.

Or we can consider the possibility that psychopathology is contained within the political or historical process. Perhaps “madness” is a central characteristic or quality of this domain. Yet we hesitate to say that political history is a place of madness or psychopathology.