Reasons of Mass Killing - Essay Example

?Running Head: Reasons of Mass Killing Reasons of Mass Killing Inserts His/her Introduction There are certain events inhuman history that have shocked mankind and their recollection still gets chills down our spine. The sheer brutality of those events brings shame to humanity. The horrors of those events still haunt the world and human history will always be tainted as a result of those incidents. Holocaust and Cambodian Massacre are some examples of such events. Violence in Abu Gharib jail can also be regarded as an example of immorality. Events like these have forced social scientists all over the world to understand why and what motivates normal human beings to commit such horrendous acts. Psychologists have conducted many experiments and researches in hope of unlocking the key to this mysterious negative, inhumane side of human beings. In this essay we will try to get insight on the behavior of people involved in the above mentioned events. An explanation will be sought regarding mass murder and political killings committed by normal people. Human behavior will be explored to find out the reasons for such violent behavior and in the process help of famous experiments conducted by different psychologist will be taken. Why People commit Mass Murder? It is important to understand at this point that how mass murders and political killings take place. In Holocaust the decision of persecution of Jews was taken by the German leaders like Hitler and Himmler. But the orders were carried out by German soldiers on ground. It is hard to believe that all of the German army was as sick as Hitler and Himmler. It is not possible that all of the members of the German army themselves wanted to kill Jews in large numbers. Therefore it is important to understand the thinking and mindset of German soldiers who were on ground involved in the mass killings. The responsibility of the killings lies not only on German leaders but on German soldiers too. Why they did not refuse to commit such atrocities? And why they killed people in large number? These questions are intriguing and we will attempt to find answers to these questions here. Authority can force common people to accept and commit acts that they are not willing to. Human beings can a tendency to readily accept anything coming from an authoritative position. The perceived authority of the source plays an important role on acceptance of the person. People tend to give in easily to authority and this was explained by Milligram in his studies. Miligram’s Study on Obedience The experiment conducted by Miligram brought the world’s attention to the dangerous effects of authority. It was the first time when the world came to know to what extent authority can effect on human actions. In the experiment of Miligram (1963) participant was given the role of a teacher and a confederate was staged as a student (both were sent to different rooms). Then the teacher was given a shock from a shock generator to make him or her realize the real nature of the electric shock. The teacher was given a list of pair of words and he or she will say the name of the first word and will provide four possible solutions. The student will have to answer and in case of each wrong answer the teacher would increase the shock by 15 volts. It was eventually found that 65 percent of the participants kept on increasing the voltage of the shock till it reached its maximum limit, even though the ‘student’ kept on shouting and banging their hands on the wall (Miligram, 1963). This study presents the effect of authority on normal people and partially explains the behavior of people involved in the Holocaust. Under authority a normal person can go on doing something terrible without thinking about his or her actions. Coercion and reward were jointly responsible for behavior of German soldiers because they were under the authority of their leaders and reward was offered (sometimes in monetary forms and sometimes in the form of approval of the superior) (Blass, T. 2000). Discipline is one of the pillars of any military. Soldiers are trained to obey orders at all cost so this was the reason why they could not react to violence. They were just ‘accepting’ orders. The same can be seen in Cambodian massacre where around 1.7 million people were killed (Penh, P. 2010). The problem is that people are obedient to authority so much so that they can even commit violent crimes. They are actually under influence of their leader as one of the killers in the Cambodian mentioned that he did it because his boss was present there (Scheper-Hughes, 2004). This was also the case in the Abu Gharib jail where soldiers were abusing prisoners after their superiors told them to do so. People feel that they have no other option but to follow the orders as it was evident in the Miligram experiment. Zimbardo’s Study on Role Play The concept of role play can also play a role in the violent actions of the people in the mass murder of innocents. Zimbardo conducted an experiment in which participants were asked to play roles of prisoners and guards (1973). After sometime the experiment had to be called off because guards were becoming aggressive and violent with prisoners. This experiment showed the effect of role play on a normal human being. When normal people were given role of guards they became just like guards in their behavior. This can be used as a justification for the violent actions of soldiers in Holocaust and Cambodian mass murder. Soldiers when wearing uniform and given a position perceive themselves in an obedient role. They may perceive themselves as doing the right thing by killing people because it was in the greater good. This might give some explanation about the apathetic behavior of soldiers in these events. They considered themselves as soldiers who are ought to be obedient and they must take action to ‘save others’. Even a normal person if given an authoritative role can behave in a different manner. He or she immediately becomes confident and tries to fulfill the role he or she is assigned. Soldiers were also considered themselves in a role of authority and that is why they behaved violently without remorse. The thought that it was their duty to do everything they were being asked to do. Soldiers are seen as following orders and saving the nation from any trouble. This plays a great role in the encouragement of soldiers in war. Soldiers fight hard because they believe that their role is to save their country. This was the same thing that happened to Abu Gharib prison officials who thought that their role was to save their country. It is actually a process of internal rationalization. Soldiers justify their actions by telling themselves that they have to perform in a specific manner in order to safeguard the interest of others. This is the effect of role play because a person expects himself to behave in a manner that is in line with the role he or she is assigned. This psychologically impacts the individual and forces him or her to behave in that specific manner. Scapegoat Theory Another explanation of the behavior of people involved in mass murder and political killing is scapegoat theory. Scapegoat theory says that people vent out their frustration on members of other social groups (Girard, R. 1986). It proposes that bias and prejudice in takes place because members of the stronger social group discriminate against weak social groups and in this way externalize their problems. This theory tells us that people associate their all their troubles to a particular social group and in this way they justify mass murder of this group. It is important to understand that it is an attempt of soldiers to rationalize their actions. People have many troubles in their lives. They cannot accept that these problems are because of their own deficiencies. People find it very hard to accept that they lack the skill or efficiency to solve their problems. Also there are many uncontrollable events in a person’s life. Not everything is controllable is find in the common man so he or she has to develop a reason for all problems he or she is facing. This is important for people in order to maintain a level of self esteem. This can be seen in Holocaust as well as in the Cambodian Massacre. In the Second World War German people used Jews as scapegoat for all their problems. There were many problems in Germany before Second World War. Inflation was very high in 1920’s and the great depression caused a lot of damage to German economy (Stackelberg, R. 1999). But Hitler attempts to revitalize the economy were successful. Industries were started with sole aim of producing weapons and military items. But Hitler snatched freedom from German people. All political opponents of Hitler were sent to prison or were killed. Also a mechanical life started where people had no time for fulfilling their aesthetic sense. All these problems and troubles were linked to Jews and German people (mainly due to mass propaganda by the Nazi government) started to believe that Jews were the reason of their problem. They used Jews as a scapegoat. This is what assisted in the mass murder of Jews in the Second World War. The same was the case in the Cambodian massacre. The regime of Khmer Rouge tried to end all minorities because they thought they were a threat to Cambodian culture and values (Jackson, K. 1989). People who were killing in Cambodia also thought that their problems were because of minorities and in this way they vented out their frustration. The violence at Abu Gharib prison is also a similar example as US soldiers considered the prisoners responsible for the death of American citizens and therefore they justified their a actions in this way. Deindividuation Another way of explaining the behavior of people involved in mass murder is by a concept known as deindividuation. According to this theory an individual loses his or her identity in a group and so performs actions that he or she would perform individually (Festinger, Pepitone, and Newcomb, 1952). This theory explains the violent and antisocial behavior of people when in groups. When in a group we tend to do things which we would not do alone because in group our identity is hidden and no one is able to identify us. This was the problem with the German soldiers. They were performing crimes in groups so they did not hold themselves responsible for it. They were not doing it but the whole group was doing it. This is why they did not feel remorseful about their actions. They were diffusing responsibility to the higher authorities. German soldiers were actually rationalizing their actions by associating them with others. Each one of them felt that doing so because everyone else was doing it without any problem. People find it very hard to believe but a person can do evil things if he or she conceals individual identity in group (Postmes & Spears, 1998). The same thing happened with the Cambodian massacre and in the Abu Gharib prison. Soldiers were doing it because their fellow soldiers were doing it. They did not feel responsible for their actions because they thought that they were personally not responsible for it. People lose their sense of morality in groups because they are able to hide themselves from others. The morality of a group captures their own sense of morality and as result mass murders are made possible. Conclusion Mass murders and political killings in Holocaust and Cambodia have shocked humanity. Social scientists have tried to find out the reasons of this shocking human behavior. The answer lies in the concepts of obedience to authority, role play, scapegoat theory and deindividuation. We human beings have a tendency to follow authority and we change our behavior according to the roles we are assigned. We try to vent out our frustrations on minority social groups and as a result mass murders take place. References Blass, T. (2000). Obedience to Authority: Current Perspectives on the Milgram Paradigm. New York: Routledge. Festinger, Pepitone, & Newcomb. (1952). Some consequences of deindividuation in a group, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47: 382-389 Girard, Rene. (1986). The Scapegoat.  Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press Haney, Banks, & Zimbardo. (1973). Study of prisoners and guards in a simulated prison. Naval Research Reviews, 9: 1–17. Jackson, Karl. (1989). Cambodia: 1975-1978 Rendezvous with Death. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Milgram, Stanley (1963). Behavioral Study of Obedience, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 67 (4): 371–378 Penh, P. (2010). When does a massacre become a genocide? The Economist. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/blogs/asiaview/2010/09/indictment_cambodia Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (1998). Deindividuation and anti-normative behavior: A meta-analysis, Psychological Bulletin, 123: 238-259 Scheper-Hughes, N. (2004). Violence in War and Peace. London: Wiley-Blackwell. Stackelberg, Roderick (1999). Hitler's Germany: Origins, interpretations, legacies. New York: Routledge. Read More