Tantrumentalism
By Andrew Maxwell
(Started in the autumn of 2006 in the middle of the suicide bombing meltdown of the Iraq war.)
Suicide bombers are, in my view, the most disturbing phenomenon of recent history. 9/11's perverse, non-strategic irrationality brought this phenomenon home to many of us, and caused us to wonder: what motivates these people? What could the agenda behind this horrible and self-destructive behavior possibly be?
London columnist Brendan O'Neill inquired after the psychology of suicide bombers in his excellent 9/26/06 essay entitled "Iraq: The World's First Suicide State" (found at http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/1700/).
It is not sufficient to call suicide bombing evil. Certainly it is monstrous behavior, but such a label gives us no tools to deal with or understand it. It is not sufficient to declare war against it. For, with suicide bombers, the rules of war do not apply. Compared with suicide bombing, war is rational and negotiable; it involves two or more groups who are interested in furthering or preserving their interests. A treaty, a contract of faith, is typically what ends a war. But suicide bombers, by virtue of their eagerness for death, are not acting in their interests. There is no faith with them, except in their own martyrdom. You can't negotiate with someone who cares not for their own preservation.
So, many of us fret that we are powerless to negotiate with or confront this peculiar, seemingly self-perpetuating malignancy. The old rules do not apply. As we fixate on discerning the agenda of something that seems to defy agenda, we despair.
I have always been struck by the pathetic-ness, the childishness, of suicide bombers. It has always seemed ridiculous and counter-productive to me. Then one day it occurred to me: perhaps it is not a question of ideology or grievance. Maybe it's not so complicated. Indeed, I believe we can de-mystify, de-fang, and prevent suicide bombing if we see it as a symptom of a psychological, not an ideological problem.
Think of suicide bombing as the ultimate childish tantrum, and a suicide bomber as the ultimate spoiled, manipulative brat. Have you ever seen a hysterical child hurt him/herself in a pathetic attempt to spite others? I propose a word for those untamed ones who scream themselves hoarse thusly: tantrumentalists.
It is not because of oppressive parenting that children tyrannize with tantrums. On the contrary: it is because the parents are overly permissive. Tantrums happen in the absence of authority. Children are tremendously insecure and self-destructive in chaos. They need the reassurance of strength and order around them. Strong authority is comforting and necessary for children, and the lack of it is toxic.
It is not because of political oppression that suicide bombings occur. It is because there is too much freedom, and not enough law. It is because no one is in charge. With no one in charge, with no tradition of authority to which everyone submits, you have chaos. Chaos causes intense insecurity in a population, and unleashes the worst in any people.
Add to this chaos a small handful of those who embrace a nihilistic theology (it doesn't take many), and voila! We have the freak Mr. O'Neill has called the "Suicide State."
"Nihilistic theology?" Isn't this a contradiction in terms? How can one believe in nothing and in God at the same time? But remember: a suicide bomber's only faith is in their own martyrdom. Nothing else matters. Their faith consists of but one article. This is nearly zero faith, thus it is nearly nihilism.
Saddam was a butcher. Perhaps Iraq was a big twisted personality cult. Perhaps he had to go. But there was order under Saddam. And order matters.
In Arab countries, dictatorship is the only stable form of government, whereas democracy has invariably led to chaos. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Libya, Tunisia, Yemen, Oman, Qatar, Kuwait, all our stable Arab allies, are dictatorships or monarchies. The only Arab democracies (Lebanon and Palestine) are long-standing terrorist havens, unable to control their populations, and constantly teetering on the brink of civil war. Lebanon and Palestine have been this way for decades; Iraq, courtesy of the U.S, is a recent inductee to this group.
It is a fool's errand to attempt to forcibly import pluralism into a country that has known only tribalism. It is out of character; Arabs have been ruled by overlords for millennia. It may always be so. Toppling a despot in such a place without having an immediate replacement to fill the political vacuum is a tremendously irresponsible thing to do.
This is not a genetic criticism of Arabs. This is a realistic commentary on cultural evolution. The tribal level of culture is the default, most natural stage of political development. All of the democracies of the world evolved from this condition (see "The Three Stages of Cultural Evolution"), through long periods of dictatorship, toward pluralism.
It wasn't because of outside righteous pressure that Europe evolved from tribalism, through dictatorship, to pluralism. It was because Europeans, over time, found their collective voice and chose this way for themselves. Societies must evolve at their own pace, on their own terms, often after weariness from kicking the crap out of one another.
If Arabs ever outgrow their overlords and evolve toward pluralism, it will be because Arabs decide, not an idealistic, uninvited entity overseas.
Islam is not an enemy of the West. Chaos is an enemy of the West. Chaos is no friend to Islam either. Chaos attracts nihilists like feces attracts flies. Given chaos in an Islamic country, a tiny minority of nihilists (it doesn't take many) flock to it and cause genuine terror. But: these nihilists are a tiny minority. The overwhelming majority of Islamic people aren't nihilists. Order is craved by the great majority of people in Islamic countries.
So the West and Islam actually have a common enemy, and a common preference. I dare say even the nihilists will calm down a few notches once order is restored.
Strong, authoritarian rule is the only solution in a tribal society. Democracy comes later, and from within, if at all. Order lays the groundwork for ideas. Fight chaos, establish order, and you take away the soil in which tantrumentalists can germinate, and you provide the soil in which decent people can carry on. This calms down tyrannical children, and other by-products of anarchy.