Intraspecific Human Aggressiveness

(Rebellious Angels Seventh Part)

road rage warming

When aggressiveness, which is an integral part of our genetic inheritance, causes such “inhuman” episodes like cannibalism, the emotional reaction is calling monsters those who carry them out, considering them as subjects not belonging to our society.

All this is only a superficial operation because these manifestations are an integral part of man’s biological inheritance and of his being an animal like other animals.

If we refuse this, we deny the conflict that may be between the rational or spiritual part and the animal one of man. Even cannibalism was, in the past, an integral part of human culture and as such it has survived till nowadays.

Recently in Borneo a war among tribes ended with gangs of furious Dayak, Christian, who chased thousands of Maduresi, Muslim, and fed on them[1].

Dayak head cutters

This episode might apparently be in contrast with the theory of the genetic origin of the homicidal violence applied to the monsters of Rostov because, otherwise, we should prove that all the members of Dayak ethnic, just like many cannibal serial killers, were carriers of a chromosome y more.

In that tribal culture it’s normal for aggressiveness to turn into episodes of cannibalism. I mean, since in some tribes, under a cultural point of view, feeding on their own enemies is “normal”, it isn’t necessary having a special genetic inheritance to commit acts of cannibalism: it’s like in civil societies, during wars, when mild subjects are forced to behave like aggressive ones[2].

In civil society in order that a person can commit an act of cannibalism, which everybody rejects, it’s necessary for the genetic tendency to aggressiveness to be particularly strong( for instance because of a supernumerary chromosome y) and for such tendency, together with other factors like a difficult infancy and a degraded environment, to annul the censure that education activates against taboos like cannibalism.

Therefore, in civil societies, it’s easier for a genetic predisposition to aggressiveness to turn into episodes that, without violating sacred taboos like no feeding on human flesh, are as abnormal as cannibalism is, but more conventionally accepted because in accordance with the present culture and economy[3].

modern cannibalism

In civil society the taboo of death is as strong as the one of cannibalism and, even in natural cases, it is more and more delegated to specialists( doctors) who are interested in them in a technical and aseptic way, in closed sites which aren’t mostly accessible to public( hospitals). At the same way also aggressiveness is more and more mediated by technical instruments so that death which is consequent an act of aggressiveness may be something remote, neither tangible nor visible to those who caused it. We start in a virtual way from videogames like”Carmageddon” to get to wars like the one of the Persian Gulf against Saddam Hussein which media changed into a”surgical”war.

[1] Richard Lloyd Pery, a journalist of the Independent listened to a teacher who had witnessed one of the massacres” they caught the corpses, cut their heads, ate the hearts and drank the blood”. Strangely the spark that caused the tribal war to break out lighted up during a pop concert.

[2] Actually during the last war there were various episodes where pacific subjects refused to commit massacres or simply kill, paying, sometimes, their refusal with their own life.

[3] In 1996, in the States, there were 41,000 casualties. Three-quarters of them were caused by arrogant drivers. The American Congress has even coined a new word“Road Rage” just to define the aggressiveness spreading over motorways. The instrument of aggressiveness becomes the car the aggressive features of which are constantly exalted by commercials.

Road rage

The need to replace wrecked cars is an incentive to an economic increase just as “reconstruction” is after every war. The seriousness of Road Rage and the consequent fatal casualties depends on he fact that in a grapple war, as it was in the past, subjects with a marked genetic aggressiveness eliminate each other, while on motorways the most aggressive people eliminate themselves, but also gentically more pacific subjects. This way the original propotion between mild subjects and aggressive ones remains unchanged and the phenomenon is incensantly nourished. Also people who, in other cases, couldn’t do so since aggressiveness is apparently addressed to an object, a car, rather than a person of the same species, Road Rage lets them overcome the taboo of homicide. Maybe stone throwers from overpasses couldn’t have carried out their game if, instead of anonymous objects like cars, only human beings had passed.

Translated from “Il Virus Intelligente” by Enrica Narducci

To be continued in:

VIII) Intraspecific Human Aggressiveness (Rebellious Angels Eighth Part)

IX) Intraspecific Human Aggressiveness (Rebellious Angels Ninth Part)

X) Parricide (Sweet Dear Mum – Rebellious Angels Tenth Part)

 See also:

I) Intraspecific Human Aggressiveness (Rebellious Angels First Part)

II) Intraspecific Human Aggressiveness (Rebellious Angels Second Part)

III) Intraspecific Human Aggressiveness (Rebellious Angels Third Part)

IV) Intraspecific Human Aggressiveness (Rebellious Angels Fourth Part)

V) Intraspecific Human Aggressiveness (Rebellious Angels Fifth Part)

VI) Intraspecific Human Aggressiveness (Rebellious Angels Sixth Part)