Speculations on Running Amok
Published in Frankfurter Rundschau
(Germany) on 6 November 2009
by Christoph Albrecht-Heider (link to original)
We amateur psychologists reach once again into our kits to cobble together an explanation for the shooting spree at Fort Hood. We point out that the perpetrator was (a) Muslim (who suffered religious taunting from his coworkers); (b) against the Iraq war (with guilt feelings because he was a member of the U.S. military); and (c) unmarried with no girlfriend (desperate and lonely). These are reasons for mass murder? Perhaps, but alone they don’t add up to a convincing analysis.
Two constants, however, are evident: first, it’s always men who run amok; second, easy access to guns ensures that those who embark on their own personal revenge campaigns will be assured a high body count. That may well explain why these bloodbaths happen predominantly in the United States.
But attempting to understand Army psychologist Major Nidal Malik Hasan and his motives will lead to neither a detailed explanation for the attack nor to any concrete preventive measures for the future. We just have to live with that helpless feeling.
Two constants, however, are evident: first, it’s always men who run amok; second, easy access to guns ensures that those who embark on their own personal revenge campaigns will be assured a high body count. That may well explain why these bloodbaths happen predominantly in the United States.
But attempting to understand Army psychologist Major Nidal Malik Hasan and his motives will lead to neither a detailed explanation for the attack nor to any concrete preventive measures for the future. We just have to live with that helpless feeling.
As an Arab-American, he is expected to have close links to terrorist groups. Being a Muslim, lonely and umarried can not be convincing reasons for such atrocity. Anyway, such happenings are inevitable as long as logical approaches are found.