The level of aggression is alarmingly high. Where does this aggression come from and how to overcome it? We are talking about this in the editorial office of Psychologies with psychologist Ekaterina Mikhailova.
Psychologies: Ekaterina Lvovna, how to explain the desperate desire of many of us to see enemies everywhere and fight them to the bitter end?
Ekaterina Mikhailova: Somewhere I came across an exact observation (I think it was from Dmitry Bykov): the civil war has not ended with us. I fully agree with this. The formal end of hostilities is either a peace treaty or the signing of capitulation. When the enemy is partly expelled, partly exterminated, there can be no time and place for the end. And somewhere out there, in these times and places, there are a lot of painful topics that have not yet rested. In part, they were deliberately used and are being used politically, and in part they work on their own. There is such a thing — a complicated traumatic experience, when one trauma or loss replaces another. When you can no longer find the ends, it is not clear who is right and wrong, everyone has become brutalized, it is always and everywhere unsafe. And if it ends slowly, but there is no clear final point, and if the traumas experienced are not processed, and the mourning is not completed, then a special kind of suggestibility arises. A suffering person gladly accepts everything that reduces suffering. The people who are rushing about, afraid, escaping (and more often not escaping), who do not know what will happen tomorrow, who do not understand who these people in unmarked military uniforms are, whether they are their own or others, will they shoot at you or not … The people who survived all this are ready to lay down their souls for a simple, understandable and optimistic picture. And then, naturally, a dictator appears who proposes it. The next is known.
Speaking of injuries that follow one another, what events do you mean?
EM: We are talking about life’s trials, with which a person does not have enough mental strength to cope. Their strength exceeds human defenses. But everyone’s sensitivity is different. Therefore, an event that is unpleasant for one person may be simply unbearable for another person. He simply cannot comprehend it, cannot treat the experience as one of the many facts of your life. And there were enough such phenomena and events in our country in the XNUMXth century. And it’s not even just revolutions and wars. If you remember, just in the post-revolutionary years, the thesis was put forward that with the victory of socialism, the class struggle does not subside, but intensifies — which, in fact, was the theoretical justification for terror. Several generations of our ancestors lived, constantly evaluating the world from the position of «friend or foe.»
And going back to the never-ending civil war, here’s something interesting to think about. Some soldiers who fought on the side of the whites — not only officers, a white bone, fought for them — and who did not die and did not sail on the last steamer to Harbin, they remained. And they went over to the side of the Reds, close to the class, and, perhaps, quite sincerely. But at the same time, in fact, they violated the once given oath. What is actually a shame for a man, even if he is not a nobleman. And also trauma. Bitterness and the desire not to think, not to remember, not to feel are connected things.
When there are many such traumatic events, when a person has lived for a long time in a situation of fear, humiliation and powerlessness, what happens to his psyche?
EM: A callus forms and sensitivity decreases. But even if such a person ceases to feel acutely, this does not mean that he does not feel anything. How our ancestors coped with traumatic experiences depends on many circumstances. For example, on how old they were when the traumatic event occurred (the smaller, the stronger the experience); on what role models in a situation of severe stress they could see in other people, primarily in their loved ones.
- Stephen Hawking: «Our aggression will destroy us all»
But it’s still about the old days. And if a grandfather once changed his oath or a grandmother suffered during the war, why does their experience become a trauma for their grandchildren as well?
EM: There is the concept of transgenerational — transmitted through generations — trauma. Its mechanisms are being explored, for example, by the remarkable psychologist Anne Ancelin Schutzenberger. We all «receive messages» from our grandparents, don’t be under any illusions about it. And if the grandmother even told something terrible, it’s still easier to get along with than if she didn’t tell anything at all. Because the story can be rethought, it can be supplemented, it can be doubted, in the end … But if she didn’t tell at all or it’s not very clear why she died, and they don’t talk about her in the family, then there’s just possibility of unconscious transmission of trauma. Ann Schutzenberger has amazing observations about babies who die in the womb or immediately after birth. It shows that if all stages of experiencing this loss have not been completed, its processing has not been completed, then the next child is already automatically at risk. A shadow seems to fall on him — on his better future, on the hopes that everything will be fine with him. When former children are not properly mourned, the next are born weak. There is no logical explanation for this, but it is (1).
Are you talking about the stages of accepting traumatic events?
EM: Yes it is. They are well known to psychology — denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance. And I have a feeling that our society is still stuck in the phase of anger. The accumulated traces of traumatic experience associated with intergroup aggression, aggression from the state, any other aggression — they «caking» into unbearable layers and continue to generate some kind of energy, which is dangerous by definition. And we hang out on the axis «victim-aggressor», as if you can only choose from these two positions. «These» and «these», «local» and «non-local» — this eternal alternative lives and wins. Note the ongoing conflicting nature of relationships in all areas — doctors and patients, students and teachers, sellers and buyers, anyone with anyone. If there are groups of people who need each other for some reason and who seem to have something to do together, then poisonous “inflorescences” of suspicion and readiness for aggression immediately bloom. And in the most peaceful circumstances. Wherever there is a possibility of a smoldering quiet division into “us” and “them”, “us” and “them”, everywhere suspicions and aggression flare up, no matter what it is about – national affairs, the economy, sexual orientation. And look at the media space. Over the past many, many years, is at least one discussion among us really a discussion? This is pure reaction — rage, anger. And no search for truth. Because there is a need to shout, not to seek the truth.
But is the «irritated» relationship between patients and doctors or sellers and buyers peculiar only to our country?
EM: Of course no. But the more plots of unprocessed trauma in a society for a limited period of time, the stronger this phenomenon manifests itself. Of course, in other countries people also suffered and died. But when these are protracted events and there is no time, there is no intention, desire and strength to think through, feel, speak out, complete the work of grief, the likelihood that the image of the enemy will involuntarily be projected onto anyone at the first opportunity is, of course, greater. We are “jammed” in the phase of anger, we shout “no” and throw our fists at anyone we have to. «With a feeling of deep indignation,» of course.
What can be done about it?
EM: For starters, talk about what happened to the person. This happens in most countries, be it Germany, which survived Nazism, or the countries of Latin America with their endless civil wars and coups. If something cruel, traumatic, unfair happens (even if it was a long time ago), they work with it. Psychologists know from experience that sometimes it is impossible to do anything other than let the person talk about what they themselves have seen and experienced. Because even in itself this story is already an ordering of experiences. Moreover, the customer of this work to overcome the trauma is the society, sometimes even the state. The person himself is far from always capable of this. Firstly, he may not really understand what is happening to him. And secondly, he may be too ashamed to ask for help. After all, trauma concerns not only the children and grandchildren of the victims. Executioners too.
- 4 rules of communication without aggression
Well, if grandfather, for example, was a well-deserved Chekist and with his own hands put a hundred enemies of the people against the wall, and his grandson is proud of him today, then which of them is experiencing trauma?
EM: I would rather suggest that such pride is still protection. You can be proud that you are poor. You can be proud of the fact that you, without flinching, cut off the head of a chicken, you can be proud of anything. Attributing value to something that is traditionally considered a sin or misfortune is usually a psychological defense. In addition, it is also very important to understand why a person is now speaking in this way — and to whom he is speaking. Perhaps this is also some form of aggression towards the interlocutor: “And you, dissidents, were not slapped in vain!”
But does trauma inevitably lead to such dire consequences as endless aggression? Isn’t it possible to deal with it on your own?
EM: The potential for self-healing, of course, is there — as with ordinary trauma. So you cut yourself — no brilliant green, no bandages, well, what can you do. If the infection does not get into the wound, it will heal, of course. It will be worse to heal, longer than with brilliant green and bandages, but it will heal in the end. But it takes time for the self-healing mechanisms to kick in. And when one injury replaces another, this does not happen. The body simply does not have time to cope with them.
You mentioned Germany, where, after the defeat in World War II, the society did an impressive job of overcoming the national trauma. Should Russia take a closer look at this experience?
EM: Maybe, but let’s be realistic. In Germany, it was about a regime that lasted 12 years. People who knew how to think the way they thought “before” were still alive. People who thought differently and managed to escape, escape — they were alive and returned. Not to mention the fact that Germany is a small country compared to Russia, which suffered a heavy defeat.
But if we talk about the trauma of terror, then after all, there was an attempt to repent — the XNUMXth Congress of the CPSU?
EM: I think that Nikita Khrushchev’s speech at the Twentieth Congress cannot be called repentance, primarily because the report said «they» and not «we.» They are bad people who have made individual excesses. And when “they” and not “we”, it is no longer repentance, it is an accusation.
So what should be done so that we stop endlessly playing the aggressor and the victim?
EM: I’m not ready to talk about it on such a scale. Turning back the Siberian rivers and planting corn beyond the Arctic Circle is exciting, but empty. A private person is much more interesting to me. Simply because between me and him there is no organization that always has its own goals and for which this private person is often just expendable. If the organization is very large, this is certainly the case. Which, of course, does not mean that we cannot have wonderful people with the best intentions and in the highest positions. But this is not my question, as they say in this circle. I just work and do my best. And even if I started talking about this topic with a representative of some elites, it would be about some local, simple thing. For example, about an interdisciplinary conference on transgenerational trauma, after which a collection of materials appears, which is interesting and not too scary to read even for a non-psychologist. I would consider this a feasible contribution to what we are talking about. And this, of course, will not happen. But I can write a book about working with family history myself, and I hope I will.
And at the level of an individual, what can be done by everyone?
EM: At the level of a private person, one must finally try to move from the phase of anger. And start with yourself, of course. The next stage of processing the loss is the “bargaining” phase, when alternatives appear: what would happen if; whether other solutions were possible, what I (or my grandfather) could understand and do, and what I could not. There are people who are also stuck on it and who think about it for the rest of their lives. But in fact, this is still not such a vicious and slipping phase as anger. Here, however, reflection already begins, which in itself is very valuable. And you also need to remember a very good feeling, which for some reason is considered negative — remember sadness. Because this is the emotion that allows you to recognize the loss without trying to devalue or symbolically destroy the lost. Lost hopes included. Of course, sadness has a very wide range — from light and light to dark and heavy. But if you can afford it, if you can endure it, if you are not afraid of it, it really helps to complete the cycle of experiencing difficult events. Sadness is often confused with depression. Sadness is not the absence of emotions and desires. To experience sadness means to say goodbye, remember, mourn and accept what happened, ceasing to be ashamed of what you hoped for and believed in. At the age of 7-8, my son pestered me with the question: “Mom, why are all the books about which you say that they are good, are they so sad?” Maybe that’s why?
1. Anne Schutzenberger «Ancestral Syndrome» (Psychotherapy, 2011).