I watched a programme about the psychology of violence on BBC2 I think it was, over two nights.
The basic premise was that over the millennia the world has become less violent, due they argued to the level of testosterone falling in the male of the human species.
For those amongst you who want this to be backed up with facts, I am afraid I am going to disappoint, but that really isn’t what I am going to argue about. What interested me was the research into why and how violence was becoming less.
The thesis is that accepting the fact that testosterone levels are very gradually dropping, and that violence is less if you looked at the relative number of people killed over the millennia , the scientists looked at the apparent trigger points for violence.
One interesting fact was that 98% of violent deaths in the world are done by males.
What they found was that the more cohesive society was the less violence there is. So in a society where division is encouraged the more violence there is.
They then looked at recent political phenomena where violence has increased. The most obvious one is Germany, where an extreme form of nationalism resulted in the division of society and the deaths of millions of people. However, the researchers went on to suggest that any form of nationalism creates division, where violence increases, citing Trumps America, China, etc.
What characterises these governments was the authoritarian sometimes populist but always nationalist.
The scientist then tried to work out why, populations were as in Germany’s case apparently willing to comply with violence, division and hate. They pointed to various experiments done by psychologists (some of you will be familiar with them) where people are told by an figure “in authority” to inflict pain on a “subject” . The conclusion was that most people will believe those who are seen as the authority, without criticism. Those who are critical will be “othered” or ignored.
This is seen as why we can never be complacent and that authoritarian, nationalists should always be questioned and criticised in order for society to remain at peace.
I leave you with this, written by someone in a country has experienced what it is like to ignore the danger signals.
Britain. A German view.
“the outlines of an autocratic regime can be seen: attacks on freedom of expression & assembly, blatant corruption, cold-hearted politics against migrants”
“the opposition is sleeping”
“the govt must be forced by the public”
Wer Boris Johnson für einen Politclown hielt, hat sich getäuscht. Er verändert Großbritannien in eine autoritäre Richtung.
taz.de
