Undermining Insanity: The Breivik Ordeal

                                           Raiden:  I am Lightning, The Rain Transformed 

                                    

The use of the term insanity has always been politically charged, and the same remains true today. The Psychiatric profession's claims to a firm scientific base are laughable at best, from the electro convulsive therapy of the  past to the ever growing list of conditions that "require" medication both psychologists and psychiatrists have continually proven that the only possible explanation for their behaviour is that they are political professions.

It takes coherent thought to be able to write something, the fact that I am writing this post today proves that I am aware of my actions (to some degree at least) and that I have a thought process that I wish to convey to the wider world, this in my opinion is where the line between sanity and insanity should end (Of course in my opinion the line should be stamped out altogether but if one must legally prescribe some sort of objective test then the simple ability to reason is enough). It is of course difficult to reconcile legal definitions with practical ones - even though the common law reasonable man test is supposed to reflect the perception of lay people. The inadequacy of this test to reflect the opinions of a significant part of society can be seen in the many allegations of compensation culture aimed at the legal system/profession (a body of suited ambulance chasers). 

The surrealist movement of the 20th century highlighted the self righteous nature of the politically sane. The founder Andre Breton frequently called himself "insane" as if to mock the sentiment of his era. A decent example of this is the observation that his iconic heroine Nadja loses her appeal once it is revealed that she belongs to a sanatorium and that her flashes of what may appear to some as deep philosophical reflection about distant stars are just manifestations of her status as a woman who is clinically insane. 

Breivik is to the far right what Osama bin Laden is to the Muslim world, he is a callous individual with a twisted sense of morality and a warped ideology that relies on misinformation and hateful Nazi propaganda. His actions and the actions of the IRA or militant Christians in Lebanon have (thankfully) not resulted in the demonstration of the Christian faith but they have cast new light on the double standards of enlightened European society when it comes to Islam which is supposedly a religion of terror.  

I spent a great deal of time today reading through Breivik's manifesto (I don't advise anybody else to do so, it is long and very disturbing) but the fact that Breivik was able to construct an explosive device and meticulously plan his terror attack over 8 years while writing this giant tome of propaganda shows that he was more than capable of coherent thought. 

His lack of empathy has been cited as a reason for his insanity by some of the individuals who evaluated him, (I would question their own lack of empathy) but is empathy really a decisive factor when it comes to sanity? Was Hitler insane? Was Mao Insane? Was Tony Blair Insane? Was Osama Bin Laden insane? The list could go on, but the fact remains that humans are very capable of dissociating themselves from notions of empathy should they so desire, looking at history the rape of Nanking serves as a striking example of this. Was every single soldier in the Japanese military insane? The answer to this question is a resounding NO - these people were very conscious of their actions their lack of remorse only proves that their morality appears skewed when analysed from our perspective. 

It is the responsibility of human beings to ensure that these psychiatrists do not undermine our morality by comparing it to clinical notions of sanity and insanity. While it was once true that political dissidence in the USSR and pre-marital sex in Victorian England were grounds for insanity, our understanding of the ambiguities of politically charged labels has evolved, it is no longer in a primitive state of blind acceptance. 

When crimes become too heinous for us to understand, their motives too obscure to interpret their criminal nature must not be denied. Mr Breivik is a criminal who deserves to be killed or at least locked up for the remainder of his existence, the smile on his face in court today was an affront to families of his victims and to society at large.