(or, How To Separate Evil from Mental Illness and Interrogate its Influence.)

7456 Words.

All sectors of dissident politics tend to recruit from the fringes of society. Drawn from the margins of the prevailing status quo, they seek refuge in folds of outcast collectives that appear to share a common oppressor. In their quest for strength through numerical cohesion, it is likely – some say inevitable – that the ranks of these activated communities are predominated by those who are perennially displaced from the normative sociocultural mainstream.

A trend emerges: the preponderance of individuals characterized by antisocial proclivities, maladaptive behaviors, and, in certain instances, exhibiting indications of psychological derangement setting the cultural norms in these sectors. These people can simply be emotionally disturbed, low IQ sociopaths, or on the high end, conniving psychopaths in search of adherents. We have all encountered sociopaths, we have all encountered those with Borderline Personality Disorder, and everyone has encountered a psychopath whether or not they were aware of it. There is a spectrum of malice assigned to explain how these individuals trigger suffering in a society, but a feedback loop can emerge where the more calculated and malevolent can gather the psychologically feeble into their orbit and amplify their pathology.

A sizable percentage of these maladaptive individuals seeking social capital tend to be non-ideological, or they cloak their self-interest in whatever ideology supports their selfish designs. Do they have true affection for the proletariat, or do they simply want to torture and slaughter the wealthy? Do they genuinely believe in God, or do they want to draft new oppressions in His name? Does this individual want to return to tradition in any other form than taking a lifetime of grudges out on women? The problem is not so much that these people are extreme ideologues but rather they are extreme nihilists who will commonly have formative years moving between affiliations, skulking in the margins beside the troubled young man who may correctly identify that the world is broken in some severe way, or the environment they inhabit is a mismatch with what they feel it should be. Revolutionary movements, governments, even corporations rise or fall dependent on whether these individuals can access the levers of power.

Our mission is to understand the manifold growth of corruption that turns human organizations into engines of despair, and draw a stark delineation between the justifiably antisocial and what used to be widely known as evil.

Jailbreaking BETWEEN ASYLUMS

At present it is highly important to draw a distinction between what is evil and what is mentally ill. It is very fashionable to label anything negative as “insane.” Many readers – including the author – are guilty of this, condemning opponents as “unhinged” or vaguely “mentally unwell.” Even those highly critical of the seeding of psychoanalytic rhetoric into our social fabric will label the inelegant as schizophrenic. Our relationship with insanity has certainly changed over the centuries, where once it was spiritual corruption and presently it rests at the intersection of temporary environmental glitches, and inherited existential traumas. With this in mind it is of the utmost importance to establish whether or not there is even such a thing as an evil individual, and not a convoluted web of ill-defined diagnoses that simply remove agency from the subject.

In “Madness & Civilization,” notorious degenerate Michel Foucault attempts to outline the relationship between society and its outcasts, specifically those deemed mentally or spiritually unfit to exist within society, even those who have not criminally transgressed to such a degree as to be imprisoned or executed. Who better to judge the interconnectedness of a sewer than a rat?

Taking the admittedly narrow view of European history, Foucault explains that at the conclusion of the Middle Ages, we saw an expansion of literature concerning madness, starkly juxtaposed against the antecedent backdrop wherein the discourse surrounding madness had remained ensconced within the purview of anti-Christian values or sin. It was seen as the primary conduit of the Antichrist, the excess of knowledge that drives men insane and invites bad plans rather than emotional lust. During this period, it was linked not to man’s inexorable nature nature but rather to illusions and dreams; one became insane by probing the depths of the unknown and letting something nefarious in ^​1​. The mad were seen as untethered from social norms and were more likely to be cast aside than interrogated directly. The 17th century sees this narrative shift from madness as wandering and free to something to be confined indefinitely. Historically, the confrontation with evil necessitated a ritualistic engagement within the public sphere, a process of public expiation and resolution, however a sea change occurred where it could all be done in secret to purposefully keep it from the public. Insanity became something that could infect others, it must be quarantined like any other disease lest the insanity spread. Madness, in its newfound incarnation as an embodiment of anti-reason, begins to unfurl within the societal fabric, with unreason metamorphosing into an element fundamentally abhorrent.

“In the serene world of mental illness, modern man no longer communicates with the madman: on one hand, the man of reason delegates the physician to madness, thereby authorizing a relation only through the abstract universality of disease; on the other, the man of madness communicates with society only by the intermediary of an equally abstract reason which is order, physical and moral constraint, the anonymous pressure of the group, the requirements of conformity.” ― Michel Foucault, Madness and Civilization

Here the unreasonable metamorphoses into a spectacle, a non-human subject of morbid fascination, effectively dehumanizing those who are ensnared within its clutches. In Foucault’s view, this leads to them being treated like animals thus transforming them into animals. The environmental influence of sanity cannot be ignored, especially if those who find themselves in these segregated zones elect to be there and opt to place themselves within the margins of sanity. Those treated inhumanely may become inhuman, those of sound mind may seek to be inhuman, and inhumans may find themselves attracted to the space; the origins of those located there have little influence on how the maelstrom once encountered carries them upon its currents. The perpetrator is the victim is the environment they inhabit.

Those who are bewitched by origin stories will find themselves at a loss when devising effective solutions.

Sigmund Freud, along with the proponents of psychoanalysis as legion, rekindled the discourse surrounding irrationality at a juncture when madness had become a meandering and elusive concept, devoid of spiritual or moral definition, explained neither spiritually nor morally, simply an aberration of the enlightened secularized society. Freud reintroduced madness as a manifestation of anti-reason, which could be reasoned with as a distinct subject while still imprisoning it thereby creating a constant feedback loop of external and internal interrogation. This is the relationship with insanity as we understand it now: whether elective or unelective, it is a never-ending negotiation with oneself along with the agent of psychiatry as the mediating cleric wielding total authority.

This relationship between the psychoanalyst and political apparatus is explored in “The Therapeutic State” by Thomas Szasz, who explains tht over the course of the last three centuries, commencing with the advent of modern psychiatry, we have borne witness to the progressive medicalization of the penal system, a transformation that has extended the purview of state authority and the apparatus of incarceration. Szasz explains in exhaustive detail how formidable organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have become ensnared in an ideological and economic symbiosis with the liberal medical-psychiatric establishment prioritizing health over liberty, with a pronounced predilection for prioritizing individual health over the cherished ideals of personal liberty ^​2​. The luminary figure of Dr. Menninger, occupying a prominent position within the annals of American psychology during his era, emerges as an influential proponent of this transformative trajectory. In his expert view, a uniform therapeutic regimen ought to be extended to all, irrespective of their perceived level of mental well-being; in short, everyone is mentally ill to one degree or another, and it is up to the medical experts to judge on a case-by-case basis. This found wide acceptance in the Liberal establishment which strived to solve rather than condemn crime.

Furthermore, from a secular humanist perspective, it removed all definitional barriers between the hostile criminal and the average citizen; it was all circumstantial chains of reactions which can only be deciphered by trained mental health professionals, even when they found themselves on opposing sides of the court room.

It is noteworthy that mental illness frequently serves as an instrumentality for the encroachment upon the civil rights of individuals entangled within the labyrinthine corridors of the criminal justice system. It is up to psychiatrists – working in concert with all medical professionals – to decide when insanity removes agency from an individual’s actions, and when the force of the state ought to be brought down to protect the individual from themselves. For this reason we must treat employing this framework with trepidation; it is oft wielded during political convenience or with personal animus, and there exists scant foundation upon which to construct a gallows. If it is to be utilized as a reaction, it ought to be done so with the same ideologically-driven cynicism as one’s oppressors.

Mental illness serves as a convenient mechanism for the consignment of individuals who, in any manner, pose a challenge to the established socio-political status quo, into a realm wherein their agency and rights are summarily divested. Even proponents of the anti-psychiatric school of thought unwittingly traverse within the framework of the conventional sane/insane dialectic, thus tacitly endorsing the overarching conceptual framework which they ostensibly seek to critique.

They would tell you that psychiatry is insane.

“We achieve active mastery over illness and death by delegating all responsibility for their management to physicians, and by exiling the sick and the dying to hospitals. But hospitals serve the convenience of staff not patients: we cannot be properly ill in a hospital, nor die in one decently; we can do so only among those who love and value us. The result is the institutionalized dehumanization of the ill, characteristic of our age.” – Thomas Szasz

While America was founded with a separation between the state and organized church, this proved to be the seeds of its subversion. The innovation of the Constitution, which underpinned the nascent nation, transpired within a conceptual and ethical void, engendering an existential yearning for an anchoring moral framework. Consequently, psychiatry and the broader medical establishment emerged as expedient custodians of this moral vacuum, harnessing the tenets of secular humanism to generate logical arguments for why individuals ought to have their agency apprehended and their values and beliefs hammered into nonexistence for their own benefit. This is what many witness currently with the criminalization of hate, as the genesis of the mental health state apparatus has charged itself with not only solving crime but preventing it, using an encyclopedia of red flags and diagnoses to elevate those with bachelors degrees in psychology to the dizzying heights of Pre-Crime analysis.

As we engage in discussions on antisocial personalities and how they can corrupt movements, we must do it from a position that we have all been pathologized to one extent or another beneath these spotlights that have toasted the zeitgeist in time. We do not seek to predict future maleficent intent by way of convenient schizophrenia, and we ought not grant credence to our enemy’s tools by endorsing them too enthusiastically.

For this reason, we do not seek to psychoanalyze people, but judge them by their works. To discover evil in a lake of madness, we need to investigate what it does, not imagine its secrets.

Evil as Manifold Corruption of Man

Throughout time it was common sense that evil existed, even if the layperson was unable to create a bullet list of characteristics when prompted. It was understood that people could be afflicted with all manner of eccentricities and mental ailments – including substance abuse and sexual deviancy – but that there was still a set of nefarious behaviors that existed outside of all that, some force that whether possessing an individual by mistake or by birth, represented an attack on all their values and sense of order. While in modern times we have attempted to sweep this belief away with the broom of scientism into the dustbin of superstition, our task is to rediscover it as our toolbox cries out for its unique utility.

Russian philosopher Ivan Ilyin wrote in his book “On Resistance to Evil by Force” that evil manifests itself through a tetrad of defining attributes: unity, aggressiveness, deviousness, and manifoldness. It is through these we can separate it from any other aberrant behavior. Ilyin’s elucidation of these cardinal characteristics is instrumental in providing a nuanced perspective on the nature of evil, and how to grapple with it.

Ilyin takes a critical stance vis-à-vis Leo Tolstoy, whom much of his treatise aligns itself against. Tolstoy, arguing the position of Orthodox Christian pacifism, posited a categorical denouncement of all forms of inducement and coercion, categorizing them as manifestations of violence that ought never to be employed in the combat against evil. According to Tolstoy’s framework, this renders any resistance to evil inherently malevolent, thereby promulgating the paradoxical notion that one can only attain moral virtue through one’s own capitulation to it, and ultimate vanquishment. It is placing enthusiastic martyrdom at the center of Christian identity. Ilyin counters this perspective by asserting that human nature is not innately righteous, thus contending that appealing to a state of moral perfection, by permitting the unchecked proliferation of evil, does not inherently confer righteousness upon an individual ^​3​.

“In fact, what would “non-resistance” [to evil] mean, in the sense of the absence of any resistance?  This would mean accepting evil: letting it in and giving it freedom, scope and power.  If under these conditions the uprising of evil occurred, and non-resistance continued, it would mean subordination to it, a surrender of the self to it, participation in it, and finally, turning oneself into its instrument, into its body, into its cesspool, its plaything, an absorbed element thereof.  It would be a voluntary self-corruption and self-infection at the start, and the active spread of infection among other people and their involvement in its coordination by the end.” – Ivan Ilyin, On Resistance to Evil by Force

Moralists are more concerned with themselves and avoiding wrong deeds than they are with injecting goodness into the public. Their fixation upon the preservation of their personal moral standing frequently eclipses their capacity to engage in a comprehensive appraisal of the interplay between individual virtue and the broader societal duty, so obsessed with becoming the victim of evil that they do not consider subsequent victimizations. It is false righteousness to sacrifice your life for another or to die with them, that is only love insofar as selfish moral righteousness and has no loving connection with another soul. Would not the greater sacrifice be to condemn oneself to hell by extinguishing evil once and for all, sparing everybody else the burden and suffering?

Evil cannot be turned away from, and evil does not negate itself when met with righteous suicide. It consumes, it spreads, and it gains momentum with every antithesis that refuses to engage in combat, impotently yearning for the war to end while in the trenches. Evil must be segregated, confronted, ascertained, and if necessary meet it with violence without cruelty.

Like moralists paralyzed by a twisted ideology, agents of corruption find plentiful stock amongst the intelligent and self-aware. It is much easier to fall under the spell of confident evil than it is self-analytical righteous. In nations, communities, and organizations where otherwise good-natured people are in search for answers to the towering questions concerning purpose and direction in life, we have few answers to give them, especially in the Western world. People commonly feel uneasy or disconnected from ideal states, some conjured in their own minds and some projected onto them from the culture. In an era defined by access to information, the average individual is assailed daily by dreams, goals, and utopias ostensibly within their reach.

Coupled with the pathologizations imposed by the therapeutic state, the average person is in a constant state of angst. Kierkegaard, in “The Sickness Unto Death,” explores existential angst as an intricate terrain steeped in spiritual and psychological dimensions, that arises from the tension between the delimited confines of one’s finite human existence and the boundless expanse of their infinite potential as a spiritual entity ^​4​. Angst, in its fullest and most nuanced manifestation, crystallizes as an acute manifestation of existential despair inside this tension.

“The self is a relation that relates itself to itself or is the relation’s relating itself to itself in the relation; the self is not the relation but is the relation’s relating itself to itself. A human being is a synthesis of the infinite and the finite, of the temporal and the eternal, of freedom and necessity, in short, a synthesis. A synthesis is a relation between two. Considered in this way, a human being is still not a self.” – Søren Kierkegaard, The Sickness Unto Death

Kierkegaard’s philosophical architecture illuminates how individuals, in their odyssey through existence, become estranged from their authentic selves —their purpose, their values, and the veritable essence of their existence itself. This tension will be familiar to anyone who becomes aware of these questions, often as they age; anyone who can conceptualize an ideal will constantly be aware of how they fall short from that ideal, and our metaphysical conceptualizations of perfection itself retreat with exponential acceleration the closer we get. The more experience we accrue, the more awareness we are granted, and with awareness comes self-analysis, and therein lies the prison for some.

Madness was once considered to be the affliction of those burdened by knowledge and in their quest permitted the Antichrist to enter. Perhaps we can return to this with new eyes.

The tension between how we see ourselves and where we believe we ought to be is the fertile soil in which evil sows its seeds. Decent men can be lead astray by the blueprints they draw for themselves, offered simply the capital that malevolent forces provide. In his book “The Franklin Coverup,” John W. DeCamp untangles the convoluted and disconcerting labyrinth of child sex trafficking and the macabre theater of satanic ritual torture that sent shockwaves reverberating through the metropolis of Nebraska during the late 1980s ^​5​. More specifically it provides a case study in groups who desire to ascend ever higher along a maleficent gradient, willingly partaking in nefarious practices to satiate the hunger for power and unrestrained status. This is a story of how those with profound ambitions cobbled together wholly inside themselves can be lead along a trail of sacrifice until they stomp bloody footprints into their promised land.

DeCamp recounts how Nebraska was once a hotbed for mafia activity – the city was notorious for its corruption at all levels – and this is the environment for how a constellation of other organized crime takes root. The fulcrum of this disconcerting narrative resides in the formidable figure of Larry King and his companies, whose meteoric ascent within the Republican Party, despite his being a black man, is intertwined with a web of prodigious connections that span the political and social spectrum. We behold the story of a man who had reached the zenith of his power and influence in his city, an important city but far and away from the status of New York, Los Angeles, or even Boston. While many would feel a sense of accomplishment becoming a titan of industry in their region, or a leader of their field, some are always looking for the next level up, or a champagne room that they have yet to be granted access. Unless they are ascending, they are failing.

In their relentless pursuit of their ideal perfection, they feel a profound distance from and overcome their existential angst, these individuals evince an unsettling willingness to engage in any practice, no matter how depraved, provided it furnishes them with the keys to the uppermost strata of power. In fact, the more it separates them from the common man, the better. These sorts of individuals who will accept the most sickening initiations. The desire for power in itself is not a corruption, this is where we stake an important claim against the medical establishment who penalize what they would refer to as “authoritarianism.” It is, however, a target for other ambitious entities, especially those who have come to dominate the upper echelons of society.

The laid bare by DeCamp is one of ritualistic child abuse, hedonistic satanism, and baroque violence. This is a tableau that many would turn their heads away from, ensured they are fantasies of the paranoid conspiratorial mind. If you don’t believe this could happen, then you must not believe in organized crime. While many will label this a conspiracy theory, we are forced to ask ourselves, do we have a problem with the organization, or a problem believing the crime? Those who have undertaken the onus of pursuing allegations pertaining to ritualistic satanic abuse proffer a compelling argument, positing that these macabre rituals are undertaken not out of any inherent predilection for such heinous acts, but rather as a calculated means of accruing power through the commission of atrocities. Using child abuse as an example, we can argue that it does not matter if one is driven to tis heinous act through genetic predilection, recruitment by means of abuse visited upon them as children, or through voluntary initiation to achieve something greater: the act itself is the evil, and those who engage in it regardless of their medicalized origin story are agents of this malevolent force. There is no acceptable causality of a truly evil act, but this is also why our evil acts must be concretely defined, and their behavior understood as unifying, aggressive, devious, and manifold. Child sexual abuse cannot exist without advocating for its own normalization and acceptance. This is why sexuality broadly figures into identifying social degradation.

They’re not insane, they are not driven by bloodlust; their behavior is far more wicked. The virus of evil finds succulent host in those seeking to achieve personal ideals at the expense of others, or even those shattered by their quest for knowledge.

Evil as Manifold Corruption of Systems

While porous minds flirting with darkness can invite evil in, these same personas can be generated through pressure by a corrupted system. When a society or a collective entity finds itself led by an individual who is afflicted with derangement, a pernicious cascade effect unfolds, wherein these individuals proceed to pathologize their followers, thereby perpetuating a cycle of pathology within the larger societal or group context. In this sense, once occupies the center of a system, it spreads outward like a viral infection. It is important that we understand that extreme antisocial proclivities manifesting as the pathogen of evil is not necessarily genetic; it can generate itself in the correct environments and create infrastructures that transform those within it.

“Political Ponerology,” an influential work authored by Andrzej Lobaczewski, stands as a seminal exploration into the profound metamorphosis engendered by corruption within complex systems and the individuals ensnared therein. Having lived through both Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia, Lobaczewski had direct experience in rapid social transformation of the wider public consciousness through authoritarian influence. Psychological deviations exhibited by an imperial or authoritative figure hold the potential to exert a pronounced downstream influence upon the collective psyche of the populace, thereby significantly modulating their behavioral proclivities ^​6​. Using the Soviet Union as an example, he trains his magnifying glass upon the phenomenon of individuals so overcome with paranoia and self-criticism they would surrender their own kin to homicidal state officials. This occurs when individuals within key positions of power are sufficiently corrupted as to design systems that require others to share their delusions simply to exist within that system.

“Weak men create bad times” is a pointed summary of what’s also known as the Hysteroidal cycle, a term many are casually familiar with. It is at the juncture where stability is achieved and order is guaranteed that malevolence acquires an augmented potency, extending its pernicious influence across diverse social strata, including the grand tapestry of macrosocial dynamics. While many revolutionary movements can become party to malevolent intent early on, even for more traditional systems it is at the apex of authoritarian peace that the machinery of the state is uniquely susceptible to corruption, and the managerial class becomes permeated by dark influences.

This is all to say that ideologies are not necessarily just created by psychological deviants, but they are often corrupted by them. All to often it is those who put the plans into action and organize the human capital that reveal themselves to be wearing the ideology as a veil. A throughline emerges where new ideologies are always crafted by people on the fringes or outsiders, which necessarily appeal to deviants and other outsiders, and there is no real way to tell one from the other, manifesting certain psychological maladies or deviations. An outsider gains power and creates a system that transforms everyone into outsiders or sets unity through annihilation as the status quo.

This pervasive entanglement renders it an arduous endeavor to effectively delineate between those ideologies that harbor constructive and those that harbor deleterious intentions. Put simply, it is difficult to differentiate between those Marxists that have a deep affection for the proletariat, and those who just want to rape and kill the wealthy. These individuals, even upon the day of victory, will continue to find the wealthy even amongst equals, rewriting their ideology as they stampede across their victims.

“Such people easily interpenetrate the social structure with a ramified] network of mutual pathological conspiracies poorly connected to the main social structure. These people and their networks participate in the genesis of that evil which spares no nation. This substructure gives birth to dreams of obtaining power and imposing one’s will upon society, and is quite often actually brought about in various countries, and during historical times as well.”– Andrzej Lobaczewski, Political Ponerology: A Science on the Nature of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes

While we remain adverse to psychoanalyzing all aspects of human interaction, there are without question those who would fit the definition of a psychopath. According to Lobaczewski, psychopathy is comprised of the following constituent elements: lack of guilt for antisocial actions, an intrinsic incapacity for genuine and authentic love, and garrulousness that breaks from reality. It is imperative to acknowledge that these psychopathic individuals function not only the hosts but also the chief vanguards of malevolence, wielding both a skillful repertoire of tactics and a distinctive worldview tailored to the dissemination of nefarious ideologies. While the ambitious and the shattered make themselves easy hosts for evil, it is the psychopaths that are most adept at creating the infrastructure to propagate it, as long as it ensures they are in positions of power.

Noteworthy examples of such entities encompass criminal syndicates, street gangs, and fringe political factions. What Lobaczewski labels as “ponerogenic collectives,” with their origins often rooted in a core cadre exhibiting severe characteropathy, proceed to extend their influence by assimilating individuals from the periphery who exhibit marginally lesser degrees of severity in their psychopathological constitution. Of the two distinct categories of deviant actors contributing to the ascendancy of a pathocratic regime—namely, characteropaths and schizoids—the latter group, the schizoids, frequently assume the role of the primary instigators of societal turmoil. This destabilization tends to occur during intervals characterized by societal stability and contentment, introducing discord into an otherwise tranquil holding pattern. In this model, brainwashing is merely the propagation of mental illness by malevolent agency.

While sweeping revolutionary coups easily spring to mind, this dynamic is also identifiable on a smaller scale. Leon Festinger conducted a study gathered in the book “When Prophecy Fails,” which investigated what happened in a UFO doomsday cult once their forecasted date of alien invasion passed uneventfully. Embedding researchers inside the small suburban group, they recorded its entire lifecycle. The study functioned as a nuanced and intricate exploration, offering insights into the mechanisms by which manipulative individuals adroitly manipulate and ensnare their unsuspecting adherents ^​7​. Moreover, it ventured into the complex psyche of those ensconced within such systems, exploring how these individuals can evolve into the most zealous and unwavering defenders of their enigmatic leadership figures, even when confronted with the undeniable failings of these authorities.

Mrs. Keech, the figurehead of the group under the auspices of her ostensibly supernatural communication abilities, asserted her capacity to engage in dialogues with entities hailing from the otherworldly realms, including the spirit of her deceased father, a phenomenon she facilitated through the practice of automatic writing. Furthermore, she claimed a divine mantle for herself, proclaiming her status as the earthly conduit for Sandara, who assumed the identity of Jesus Christ and bestowed upon her the divine charge to propagate a prophetic mission aimed at illuminating the path to enlightenment for her followers. Mrs. Keech then predicted several specific dates for and end-of-days alien invasion, where they would be chosen to travel to an extraterrestrial paradise. Aside from this, there was no financial or sexual motive involved, and she had no history of founding other cults.

A significant strand interwoven within this tapestry was Mrs. Keech’s preexisting affiliations with adherents of Scientology during her proselytization endeavors. Overlap with other groups was noted as essential, as it allows for networking and vetting of people for recruitment purposes. Each of these groups is validation of existence on the fringes of society, but establishing one’s ability to work as a team. Outside of recruiting friends and family, it would be much easier to find friendly ears in conspiracy societies than business conferences. Additionally, when crafting her nascent her religion, every element was informed by other groups she was affiliated with, and evolved as she learned about aliens from popular culture.

In essence, it is a fundamental tenet that nothing is conceived in isolation but, rather, emerges through the synthesis of preexisting intellectual constructs.

“But man’s resourcefulness goes beyond simply protecting a belief. Suppose an individual believes something with his whole heart; suppose further that he has a commitment to this belief, that he has taken irrevocable actions because of it; finally, suppose that he is presented with evidence, unequivocal and undeniable evidence, that his belief is wrong: what will happen? The individual will frequently emerge, not only unshaken, but even more convinced of the truth of his beliefs than ever before. Indeed, he may even show a new fervor about convincing and converting other people to his view.” ― Leon Festinger, When Prophecy Fails: A Social & Psychological Study of a Modern Group that Predicted the Destruction of the World

In the case of this particular doomsday cult, all recruitment into the group was accomplished through personal affiliation and relationship building, no employment real mass media. It warrants mention that the group initially exhibited a marked disinterest in the pursuit of active recruitment initiatives, a predilection that altered course as the chronicle of their predictive pronouncements gradually unfurled. There were half a dozen instances where a specific date for abduction was given, and nothing happened. They were left standing in the front yard of Mrs. Keech’s home, lingering in the cold night air before returning indoors to explain what didn’t occur.  With the increasing attrition of predictive accuracy, the group embarked on a strategic pivot, subsequently weaving a narrative replete with messianic undertones, one that increasingly traversed the ethereal realms of spirituality, receding further from the tangible. Their failures were used as evidence of their success. These unfulfilled prophecies were unceremoniously dismissed as mere “tests,” a narrative stratagem that seemingly resonated with the group’s adherents, eliciting a measure of satisfaction amidst the cognitive dissonance. While occasionally newer recruits would flake away, the commitment of the inner circle to the delusions of the woman at the center could not be shaken.

The group soon embarked upon the construction of a broader ideological edifice, one endowed with an internal logical coherence that functioned as a seductive intellectual straitjacket. Once they were assured they were not going to be abducted to paradise, they set about telling the entire world that they had saved it. The trajectory of proselytization assumed an inverse correlation with its direct materialistic dimensionality, intensifying as it receded further from the realm of the palpable. Individuals entering the fold at this juncture oftentimes exhibited an elevated proclivity for profound adherence to the established doctrinal structure. The more faith is demanded, the more legitimate the cause becomes. Even failure cannot stop a system built upon this sort of corruption, madness, and broken populous. While it is nearly impossible to identify the true intentions of Mrs. Keech or those most intimate relations who ushered her onward, it is my belief that we have an example of a whirling dervish of a pathocracy that contained some germ of evil in its DNA that was only contained due to its ineptitude.

Many cults of personality across the world meet the same fate, especially those with more objectionable ringleaders. The malevolent behavior on display in this case would be the lies generated to demand more control over the subjects once the system is seen as illegitimate. Like the delineation between mental illness and evil, it is difficult – yet essential – to set apart dying for one’s beliefs and committing suicide to avoid admitting you failed. Both can be reached with alarming ease. I can’t say for certain Mrs. Keech was evil, but I can say her collective exhibited unity, aggressiveness, deviousness, and by the end, manifoldness. If you poured resources into it, the cult would scale up and only strengthen the inept delusional pseudo-messiah at the center.

A theme emerges as we investigate how evil corrupts systems and the counterbalance of good rises to meet it: evil does not proclaim, it spreads, whereas the Good always proclaims itself. The elusive nature of evil resides in its inscrutable reluctance to disclose its true countenance, as it adorns an array of deceptive masks. A prevailing sentiment among the righteous, predicated upon the conviction that the mere existence of goodness is inherently sufficient to withstand the incursions of evil, often evokes the notion that goodness exists in a perpetual state of stasis, thereby impervious to change.  In reality, that which is static is easily overtaken. Unless the righteous can meet the architectural demands of its shadow, it will fall subject to its darkness.

Antisociety Within or Society Apart

Individuals characterized by antisocial tendencies frequently grapple with a discernment between hyperbolic irony and genuine expressions of a proclivity for destructive inclinations. Anecdotal evidence pulled from this author’s life show that what begins as ironic ends up legitimate before long. These individuals, drawn to virtual enclaves replete with provocative and violent content that elicits in them a sense of excited gratification, constitute a demographic that actively seeks out such virtual spaces as a source of solace.

When you approach those disenfranchised or marginalized people with a message of “don’t you want to destroy (X)?” you are bound to net a healthy grouping of mentally imbalanced freaks. On the other hand, it is nearly impossible to gather individuals into an active community without either intentionally or unintentionally creating an opposing force. Even if you are proposing a wholly positive parallel human network, you are effectively “othering” the rest of society. The distance between this other – this negative space – seems to inform how much violence one is capable of inflicting upon it.

While segregation from oppressive collectives is essential for the survival of dissident groups, by doing so we introduce a new dimension: the spatialization of othering, the terrain upon evil flourishes. The remarkable aspect of his terrain is its recurrence, its permanence. Just as righteousness creates a shadow of evil my its mere existence, so too does the center generate its fringe correlated to its power.

In his landmark investigation into the nature of killing during combat “On Killing,” David Grossman begins with the acknowledgement that prolonged exposure to combat is largely a modern phenomenon, which means warfare as we know it is historically unprecedented. The enduring conception of the warrior’s comportment, as gleaned from historical narratives, finds itself increasingly incongruent with the multifarious demands thrust upon the modern combatant ^​8​. Whenever projecting ideal courses of action, it’s important to remind ourselves that we live in unprecedented times, especially the legions of hypothetical warriors.

People fear confrontation; empirical investigations corroborate that both soldiers and civilians alike tend to derive a sense of empowerment when confronted with the prospect of combat unfolding from a discreet distance, whereby the tangible immediacy of upfront invasion invariably precipitates a predilection for flight rather than engagement. Impersonal death preferable to even the threat of personal death. Killing is easier at a distance but at all levels there is a euphoria stage associated with the finality of the act, an experience many find disquieting. In fact it was Napoleon who remarked that this euphoria after a victory made his units particularly susceptible to counterattack.

The most pronounced apprehension towards taking a life is found at the closest proximity, at stabbing-range . There’s a palpable sense of intimacy as the weapon seamlessly extends from the individual’s corporeal frame, which is why bayonetting had to be drilled so doggedly into soldiers. It is also the reason hesitation marks exist. In plunging a weapon into the flesh of another, the weapon is transformed into a visceral extension of the wielder’s very being, resulting in soldiers taking any excuse not to stab. Even ancient Romans mocked soldiers who chose to slash, grounded in the collective understanding that the act of piercing the corporeal envelope of the adversary yielded a more fatally injurious outcome. Most murder at close range occurs when the enemy’s back is turned, and the attacker no longer has to witness the target’s expression or contend with their panicked objections. This was standardized during public executions, and why even the most coldblooded assassins opt to shoot someone in the back of the head even if the element of surprise may work in their favor. Studies also indicate there exists a chase instinct that kicks in that makes killing easier when in pursuit, where the target becomes prey and thus something less-than-equal, therefore less human. With this in mind, combat technicians have endeavored to create distance between enemies during combat, the latest innovation being drone warfare.

“Moral distance processes tend to provide a foundation upon which other killing-enabling processes can be built. In general they are less likely to produce atrocities than cultural distance processes, and they are more in keeping with the kind of “rules” (deterring aggression and upholding individual human dignity) that organizations such as the United Nations have attempted to uphold. But as with cultural distance, there is a danger associated with moral distance. That danger is, of course, that every nation seems to think that God is on its side.” – Dave Grossman, On Killing

Anything that separates us from the humanity is amplified to increase the effectiveness of killing, manifest in the discernibly reduced prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) within the cohorts of snipers and drone pilots, entities whose roles are characterized by the concomitant introduction of physical distance. Along with physical distance, Grossman lists other distances which allow people to kill with muted or absent psychological trauma: ethnic difference, cultural distance, moral distance, and mechanical difference. Mechanical difference is what you would find in the Milgram experiment, where pushing a button to cause pain is much easier than placing hands upon someone.

Crucially to our interests, distance can also be civilizational. One of the greatest examples drawn from history is that of the Huns – the barbarians – and their relationship with Rome from the outer regions of the empire. Within the perceptual framework of the Romans, the expansive terrain beyond their territorial boundaries was inexorably characterized by the presence of so-called “Barbaricum,” an abstract conceptualization that assumes its definitional contours in contradistinction to the established center. Of particular pertinence is the origin of the Huns – traceable to locales such as the Caucasus, Tanais, and Phasis – situating them within the extremities of the geographical North, often driven Southward due to conflict or famine ^​9​. These disparate tribes had nothing in the way of shared identity, strong cultural bonds, or even passionate ties to their lands. Insofar as they were able to organize, they organized against Rome. They intended to spread into every direction – including Persia – but similar to the Mongols they had their sights set on the largest empire on Earth as their neighbor. The relatively close proximity merely bolded their perceived distance.

A mélange of vivid rumors circulated concerning these barbarians, perpetuating a mosaic of mystique and trepidation; notions of bone-based armor attire, the practice of head binding to achieve a cranial configuration akin to their distinctive elongated helmets, and allegations of the abhorrent practice of boiling children alive. Additional accounts recounted the ritualistic custom known as “strava,” wherein mourning warriors would engage in the somber act of self-mutilation, involving the cutting of their hair and the infliction of facial wounds, thereby enabling them to express sorrow in a manner befitting of their masculinity; this one was most likely true. The reason this is brought to account is to establish how most accounts from the time emanate from a corpus of correspondences articulated by imperial and Christian luminaries such as Augustine. Lacking a written language or any monumental records, most of what we know about the Huns was put down by those who despised them. They were defined as that which existed vaguely outside of the empire, that which was always trying to barge its way in. Indeed the stronger the walls the more they seemed to inspire aggressors.

Like the Mongols and the Vikings, generations pass with dreams of overtaking these fertile promised lands, and this becomes the only binding force between the tribes. ^​10​

As long as these hungry, desperate, and perhaps bitter bands remain disorganized they will only ever personify that eternal negative space, that place the realm of order and power justifies itself as apart from. However, the more they coordinate and generate an oppositional identity, they can actually pose a threat against the more civilized center that becomes the target of all their ambitions. Would the Huns as we know them now have even existed without Rome as the center of gravity drawing them together and inward? Would the Mongols have organized to such a scale if not with the express purpose overtake China? The immediate space surrounding the zone of order seems to amplify in danger as the center gathers strength. They inevitably receive the barbarians they deserve.

The spatialization of opposing forces means that it will always be a necessary evil that propagates along the fringes and energizes the eternal negative space. It becomes patently evident that these shadowy realms, imbued with a sui generis character, cannot be methodically cordoned off or segregated, for they demand a form of interface. An imperium will always conjure its barbarians, the righteous will always cast a shadow of malevolence, and in both of these instances they possess both the agency and fortitude to overtake the order even if it ultimately leads to their own demise.

The multifaceted and intricate interplay between the spatialization of malevolence, the negative spatial dimensions, and the actors who traverse these landscapes must be reexamined from a more nuanced perspective. We must pause the violence visited upon those who emerge from the negative space as those shattered into antisociality are not necessarily evil, but the power of this negative space will grow in proportion to the center of power. The only way to manage the inevitable periphery of chaos is to engage with it directly and locate those whose psyches have been smashed in innovative ways before the darkness utilizes them. Without this stock, they will only have their inept messiahs.

Evil is not defined by its incongruency with stasis, and Goodness is not defined by its behavioral distance from Evil. Even under constant threat within a pathocratic system, goodness often refuses to utilize the navigational tools employed by corrupting malevolence to ensure its own survival. What is eternal must always be in motion, it must always be interfacing with life with a special focus placed upon what is diagnosed as evil, discernible by its works rather than its relationship with the fringes of the status quo. Failing this, it will inevitably spread live a virus, create vast castles of its own conflicted decrepitude, and suffocate as much life as it can within it as it achieves its final form as a pustule-blanketed blackened corpse. 

1. 1.

   Foucault M. Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason. Vintage; First Edition; 1988.
2. 2.

   Szasz T. The Therapeutic State. Prometheus; 1984.
3. 3.

   Ilyin I. On Resistance to Evil by Force . CreateSpace; 2018.
4. 4.

   Kierkegaard S. The Sickness unto Death: A Christian Psychological Exposition of Edification & Awakening by Anti-Climacus. Penguin Classics; 1989.
5. 5.

   DeCamp JW. The Franklin Cover-up: Child Abuse, Satanism, and Murder in Nebraska. 2nd ed. A W T, Incorporated; 2011.
6. 6.

   Lobaczewski AML. Political Ponerology: The Science of Evil, Psychopathy, and the Origins of Totalitarianism. Red Pill Press ; 2022.
7. 7.

   Festinger Leon. When Prophecy Fails. Martino Publishing; 2019.
8. 8.

   Grossman D. On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society. 2nd ed. Back Bay Books; 2019.
9. 9.

   Maenchen-Helfen OJ. The World of the Huns: Studies in Their History and Culture. 1st ed. University of California Press; 1973.
10. 10.

    Brownworth L. The Sea Wolves: A History of the Vikings. 1st ed. Crux Publishing Ltd; 2016.