CULTURE CONTACT

Anthropology is Everywhere

Helidth Ravenholm Consultations

Anthropology and Crime

 

(Author’s note – This post was written a while ago and scheduled for today. When I heard about the Las Vegas shooting earlier this afternoon, I thought first that I would reschedule as a gesture of sympathy with the victims, many of whom are still fighting for their lives. Then, I decided that perhaps, that was silly. It is important to know WHY. What causes crime. What motivates the criminal. What there is to do about it. More than ever, after an event like this and the knife attack in Marseille, you all have the right to know that all of us out there who have anything to do with making the world a better, safer place are doing it, and it is our duty to tell you that we are, and how. I therefore publish this article in support of not only Las Vegas and Marseille, but also in support of all who have been or will be hurt by the horrors we human beings do to each other. I’m with you with all my heart and I vow to do what I can on every occasion I can do my part.)

 

The vast majority probably connect anthropology to crime only via Bones. And yes – that can be an aspect of how anthropology can be connected to crime and understanding and solving of it. A branch of anthropology, anyhow.

But there is so much more still. Anthropology is, in many ways, a forensic science in its basic nature… its understanding of humanity as a whole and the principles of society, culture, religion, traditionalism are hugely important for understanding many motivations to commit crime that others may miss. In many cases, the person’s maladaptive psychological state forms a direct response to a specific aspect of their environment. Religious qualms, anger at non-traditionalists, people with different traditions or even people who are following traditions may all be a motivation not only for an organised criminal society, but also for solitary criminals. Serial killers may target due to a personal or socio-personal reason. A delusional mind may cling to a specific idea that will cause the person to act in a criminal way. Ideals and ideologies may trigger a budding criminal.

Anthropology is nothing without psychology and psychology is nothing without anthropology. Both are necessary to understand how maladaptive responses are created, and both are necessary to understand how to solve the crime, handle the situation at hand and above all act preventatively. We learn from past crimes, but they should not be the only ones. By studying maladaptive behaviour in the social, cultural and religious realms, we can predict, with a great enough certainty, how a group is likely to behave if they take to a violent route. It is more difficult with a single person, because a single person is invisible. Quiet. Difficult to detect. Which makes their deeds more difficult to prevent, even though their particular action was likely something that was brewing for some time and could have been prevented. Imagine a person living alone under the radar, seemingly without any criminal leanings. This does not mean that they will not commit a crime. Often, when motives are discussed, people expect a certain simplicity that might not be the case. It might not be a simple case of personal vengeance. This vengeance may only be personal to the criminal in question. It may not be a case of jealousy of someone who decides to hurt their ex’s new partner. This jealousy might be ideological in part, basing on neo-Marxism or Nazi ideals, with the person forming their bitterness around an ideological core that teaches them that others must not be deserving of their “ill-gotten” gains…they are instead, and that means others must be punished. Or the jealousy is of the attention a famous actor has gained from a loved one. It may seem impossible. It may seem invisible. It may seem unconnected, even insane, even with criminals who are never diagnosed with mental illness (like Breivik). But the motive is always there. It is anchored in the personality  formed by its environment and the SCR (so social, cultural and religious) of that said environment.

Anthropology should therefore serve, again, as a strongly interpretative science. It should be critical, as always, and assess without taking sides unnecessarily. It should serve as a connection between groups and be realistic about risks that appear in these groups’ cooperation. It should study human behaviour at its worst and offer firm parameters of what we can expect IF.

If is important. If can mean the difference between the life and death of a person, the closure for the hurt and bereaved and above all understanding. We learn from examples. Anthropology should provide them where other sciences may fumble because they forget to deal with the SCR context.

The greatest enemy of accuracy is the PC approach. While it would be great if everybody was a wonderful old chap, that is sadly not the case, and it is the PC approach that effectively prevents us from making the world a safer, better place with as few maladaptations and their consequences as possible by keeping eyes and ears shut to the trouble when it happens, especially in the starting stages. Rigid, hateful upbringing, psychological, physical and sexual violence, teaching hate and more are all at the core of all crimes, sometimes together and sometimes as a solitary factor. But they are there. They  are the consequence of social services that close their eyes “because surely, everything is fine”. They are the stranger who, when seeing a child abused, looks away, because “it’s not their problem how others raise children”. It is the law allowing for schools and modes of child rearing that allow for this kind of thinking to pass under the radar, because we should somehow all be afraid of insulting the extreme leaning traditionalists.

When people grow up ok in spite of this, they have grown up ok IN SPITE. Not because of  it. They have grown up ok because they have decided to stop the circle. By themselves, on their own. Not everyone is this strong. Not everyone learns that there is another option. Not everyone even has another option. And the fault lies with the PC approach missing that this is actually happening. There is almost a deliberate lack of connection making from people on this matter. We are all expected to behave as if the worst possible things just happen overnight. Just because. But they do not. They are a direct consequence of our behaviours, our environments and the prejudices that shape both.

My own professional experience with crime has been varied. But thus far, my approach has always worked. Not because I am some great genius (although I can honestly say that a clear mind helps a lot, and that I do, thankfully possess it), but because the principles by which I work actually work. It’s not about guesswork. Ever. It is simply about gathering data and drawing a conclusion from what is there… and while it may seem invisible and magical to those who missed the details, that is simply because they have missed the details that were already there.

There will never be a method that will prevent all crime. That is impossible, simply because it is not possible to keep an eye on everyone at all times. But what we can do is strive for less prejudice and greater understanding, less fear and less pain, more and quicker help for people of all ages and all backgrounds in need of psychological counselling. Which must be professional, not biased. We must learn to divorce hope from fact – while it would be great if an abusive family would suddenly switch into loving overnight, that is not going to happen, and by closing our eyes to the fact that nothing should be untouchable when it comes to abuse and crime prevention, that no social, cultural or religious notions can possibly be more sacred than life and safety itself, we are in fact laying the grounds for another hateful psychology to be on the loose one day, picking targets. There is action – when the crime happens, it is our duty to assess what happened, what is likely to happen still and what to do next. There is prevention – grasping the crime in potentia at the root before it has a chance to happen.

Both require knowledge of the SCR influence of psychology, and how maladaptive psychology acts in context. Both are indispensable when forming even just the basic understanding about crime and motives of a criminal.