A damaged people.(Society)(Australian indigenous population is an example of concept of group psychological damage)

SINCE THE PUBLICATION of my essay "The Psychopathological Roots of Terrorism" (Quadrant, January-February 2005) I have decided to expand and modify the concept on the strength of the feedback I have received. When I presented an abridged version of the essay at the Congress of the Royal Australasian College of Psychiatrists in Sydney, the response by some of my colleagues was startling. The level of hostility and the refusal to contemplate even the slightest deviation from the party line of "the USA is the real terrorist" was more intense than I had expected.

As long as the vitriol remains verbal, I am not concerned. As a matter of fact, I am grateful. The criticism I received showed me the weak points in my argument. The only regret I have is that because of the politically and ideologically contentious nature of my essay, the concept itself became buried under the avalanche of outrage and disdain.

I am going to compound my heresy. I am going to argue that our indigenous population is an example of my concept of group psychological damage. I do not believe in the medicalisation of social problems. By the same token I object to a tendency, for ideological reasons, to ignore the human or psychological factors in problems as well as in proposed solutions.

GROUP PERSONALITY DISORDER

In Ego and Group Psychology, Sigmund Freud referred to the virtual lack of a difference between individual and group psychology. He also approvingly referred to the famous work of Gustave Le Bon, The Crowd, which describes the development, functioning and behaviour of a group. This book was extensively used by Lenin in the preparation and conduct of the Russian revolution, and Hitler and Mussolini were also among its avid readers.

Freud and Le Bon had no hesitation in attributing a group with the qualities we are accustomed to in a description of individual psychological characteristics and behaviour. Both referred to many of these characteristics without qualifying them as pathological. Nevertheless, both Freud and Le Bon described behaviour of groups which was certainly pathological.

Probably the most famous of these examples is the French aristocrats' unanimous vote, just before the French revolution, for the abolition of their privileges. This decision led many of them to a date with Mademoiselle Guillotine not much later. Each one of them, separately, would not have dreamt of doing it, clearly understanding the consequences. Together, they were bound by the mysterious power of herd thinking, or to be more precise, unthinking. More recent examples include the passing of the Enabling laws, allowing Hitler to be the unchallenged ruler of Germany, the lemming-like behaviour of the members of the Soviet legislature, and the insistence by trade unions on open voting.