| | Steve Wolfer was puzzled: "In Post 9, Michael says ... Then he points out that ... Yet here he is now in post 74 ... Why conflate people that have violent mental breakdowns with conservative, white nationalist and Christian terrorists - or with any terrorists? There is no single, universally accepted definition of terrorism. Terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as “...the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.” (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85)
http://www.fbi.gov/publications/terror/terror2000_2001.htm
Steve, I confess that I do not have a complete theory of crime. For my senior thesis paper in criminology theory, my topic was The Choice to Think: A Metachoice to Explain the Conflicting Data of Rational Choice Theory. My professor was Liqun Cao. My foundation was Criminal Justice? edited by Robert Bidinotto. That work rests heavily on the research reported in Dr. Stanton Samenow's Inside the Criminal Mind. Rational choice theory is the classical theory of crime. (There are probably a dozen major theories and another dozen more mid-range theories of crime -- more on that, later.) In Bidotto's anthology, Dr. David Kelley asserted that there is no such thing as a "spontaneous" murder. Every murder -- perhaps every crime -- is premeditated, planned, fantasized and ideated repeatedly until it blossoms apparently without cause. Kelley's case study was a Green Beret doctor who "suddenly" killed his wife. However, the essay was without any substantiating evidence. It was entirely conjectural.
The primary problem with such case studies is getting to the truth. That seems like a tautology but as a professional psychologist yourself, you realize that people do not always "know" why they do things and even if they do, they might tell a different story. In the case of a convicted killer, the motivations to lie are obvious. Some criminals are "deniers" and others are "excusers." You can buy into their baloney or not. Of all the theories, rational choice -- and the Randian explanation of the "blank out" -- makes the most sense in most cases, but does not explain all crimes or all criminal acts.
That said, people develop mental habits, and that includes criminals. Jihadists or nazis, ELF or NLF, crips, bloods, homies, pachukos, the mafia, all of the new ethnic mafii, and the spousal abuser, all engage in self-reinforcing inputs. That is to be expected. So, it is not that listening to rightwing talk radio "makes" someone shoot a liberal, any more than reading pornography induces someone to commit rape. Nevertheless, it is no surprise when a serial rapist is discovered to have a large video library of violent pornography. It is no surprise when a rightwing terrorist has a copy of The Turner Diaries. (Agreed, I read The John Franklin Letters upon which it was based back in 1966 or so. I have not shot anyone and thus, free will.)
For my term paper for Terrorism for First Responders, I wrote about ELF, The Earth Liberation Front, considered to be America's most dangerous domestic terrorist threat. Researching that, I came upon the leftwing claim of a "green scare" analogous to the "red scares" of the 1920s and 1950s. From there, I found a wealth of information about rightwing terrorism. Part of my research came from a white paper issued by the Southern Poverty Law Center. For their work, I sent them a check. Now, I am on their mailing list. I get their Intelligence Report. In this month's issue, "North Meets South: Yankee Secessionists Partner with Racist Neo-Confederates."
|
|
