04. Agosto 2017 · Commenti disabilitati su An Ethological Approach to Megalomaniac Personality Traits · Categorie:Menu


personality disorder, psychotic delusion or what?
An ethological interpretation.

In the following essay the author will describe the feeling, thinking and acting ways of some people, that disturb their socio-cultural fitting without compromising too much it. These doing ways are manifested in several behavioral patterns, but the author think that have a common megalomaniac “core” characterizing them in repeated, excessive and pervasive ways that he will try to describe and explain by an ethological viewpoint. The method of analysis that he will use will be predominantly psychoclinic.
In a clinical-descriptive diagram diversified into x- and y-axis you can consider that “core” a long part of the horizontal spectrum of Personality Disorders and a low part of the vertical spectrum of Delusional Disorders.
These doing ways wasn’t provided as a separate Personality Disorder in the DD. SS. MM. The author hopes that this work will be useful for conceptual purposes or for facilitate the diagnostic work and communication between Psychiatrists, Forensic Medicine and Insurance Experts, including Judges and Criminologists and Psychologists.

“Megalo” aspects

The author thinks on the people who narcissistically experience “a priori” themselves as more able than other people in the fields of activity where they are involved and who develop the convictions to be more skilled, powerful, higher, better than others or therefore sources of reason, science, justice, morality, etc. Their feelings of superiority are “a priori” in the sense that it do not arise from some comparison with other people or from outcomes of studies recognized by scientific communities, but it’s autogenic and egosyntonic. The “normal” people can think in similar ways, but after having found some evidences in the reality only. The Psychotics can experience themselves even as kings or the Messiah in absolute, unshakable, delirious ways. The megalomaniacs here mentioned feel their superiority inwardly and show their thought outwardly mostly when they confront ideally or personally someone and / or are in front of an audience. In these situations, except in front to the people sharing exactly their ideas, they self-excite and feel entitled to attack the others, to have the last word on everything they discuss, to excel and to impose their ideas.

They tend to enter into competition with recognized leaders or those that they perceive as potentials ones in the human environments where they are involved, tend to annihilate them psychologically as such in front to bystanders and to show that. They can attack also entire categories especially of colleagues (for example, politicians, economists, artists, doctors, etc., categories of activities where there are margins of discretion) and, to show that the others members are all imbeciles men and that they only are the wise, attack the thoughts or/and the “modus operandi” more shared and, to stand out, they adhere or invent alternatives. When they enter new human environments, it is time to identify the local leaders and to evaluate their points of attack and they come into conflict with them also. The same happens if in the scene in which they are already entered new individuals who propose themselves or that they perceive as possible leaders. They try to overwhelm them by nullifying them psychologically verbally, but they can also try to eliminate them physically as happens to certain mafia bosses. In so doing they perform in front of the other bystanders or sub-groups of which they belong, for the hidden purpose of disqualifying them in their eyes and save themselves as dominators or taking their place and being the only dominators in the concrete or conceptual environment.

Really, they give dogmatic judgments on intellectual knowledge, situations, events and people even when they have insufficient real ability to do so, because they feel can better understand than others regardless of that or think that they know already what is sufficient to do so. They also feel a strong, exhibitionistic and compelling impulses to say what they think of all the audience or the whole world, even before to acknowledge and validate it, in order to impose on others their order, justice, peace or their new “revolutionary scientific discoveries” even against any opponent that they tend to establish or manage as “malicieus” or “selfishner” or “ignorant” in front to other people.

When they express an idea or a theory or have a social or political or religious position don’t change it even in face of opposite arguments, both for the absolute value that they give to it and because they base their credibility and social or professional success on it. If it is attacked by others people they don’t perceive their own possible errors and seek rather more attachment points of the ideas, theories or positions of opponents. Unlike the Psychotics they can review or limit the show of their own ideas if they are contradicted by very big real evidences or are rejected “by popular acclaim” only. Until then they try to impose their theses up to almost “quantistically” change the reality!

At the purpose to impose their ideas on others people they can recur to rationalizations or simplifications or intellectualizations or superficial or fanciful or generic analysis of reality or slogans or jokes or sarcasm or irony or verbalisms or bombastic phrases borrowed from great people or raise the voice or use offensive or humiliating words if they are particularly aggressive or appear to others as little angels or shamelessly or violently in order to compete and win over any opponent; always acting with lack or shortage of tact. They think that by their verbal ability can to manipulate the other people. But usually they abuse in do that and in long times fall into gross mistakes and are ridiculed.

Because their “enlightening”, “precious”, “original”, “strong” and exhibited “truths” they expect to be thanked, admired and revered by others. They expect even that others accept their “inferior status” towards them and, in the bottom of themselves, that feel the guilty because “exist” and “occupy a space in the World” or “hinder” their passage!

In their private life (with their friends) and in the free professional activity (with their clients) they prefer meet the people with a lower intellectual level than their own or people needy helpers to whom they can more easily impose their ideas and from whom they can more easily to be acclaimed and to accepted as leaders. They usually avoid the different people with whom very easily and without hesitation come into conflict as it does, for example, in work with the colleagues and especially with the superiors, in family with parents and brothers and in other communities. In not selected settings (work, prison, school, etc.) they can intervene unduly in discussions and situations although it does not interest directly them: at the beginning with cautious ways, for be not immediately rejected by others in their ranks, and at the end also giving scathing and sometimes aggressive judgments even if not required them.

Their superiority feelings and consequently convictions arise in their mind does not lonely but integrated into a system-ideas, more or less well systematized according to their cognitive abilities and culture, which usually stems since their pre-adolescence or adolescence and that they will keep for a lifetime, dissolving partially in old age only. But they, at the time, can come up with new interpretations of reality or new arguments or theories, always “pro domo sua”, to take new positions, still in order to combat leadership competitors and excel in the field. At the same goal, if they change their needs or change the actors or the spectators on the scenes they can become even advocates of the thesis or theories, judgments or interpretations opposite to these previously incurred. They feel qualified to do so without shame because a sort of “divine right” coming them from their superiority or merits!

When they don’t have an initial success in attempting to impose their truths, they can resort to rewording their explanations, theses, and theories by compromising the facts presented by others, still in any case in order to impose their ideas, that’s themselves. If they don’t succeed even in such an attempt or alternatively they can also consciously, instrumentally and fraudulently resort to forcing the truths or to manipulate the other’s perceptions of reality, always for the before wrote “divine right” or merits and without feeling of guilty of their unethical conduct and perceiving and presenting their opponents as “criminals” or “blasphemers”. We say in Italy: “They wish fall always standing up!”.

Even when they talk and act decisively for some idea or somebody they think (or falsely claim, when they are struggling to assert themselves) to do so for altruistic variously rationalized or intellectualized purposes. But in this case also a thorough analysis can detect that, really, they always tend to impose themselves and their domain on others people, many times against some “leaders” present in the scene. This happens even when they think (or say instrumentally) to act in the interests of justice, honesty or science. Even when they defend someone, in fact, if you take heed, they act against some other “leader” perceived and presented at the audience as “bad” or “false” or “wrong” and therefore worthy of being “removed”, “kicked”, “eliminated”, implicitly proposing themselves in his or her place. At such ends, sometimes, they come even to auto-attribute responsibilities or representations of others, always to enter the scene and impose themselves.

What they feel, think and do with confidence and determination is independent of their actual internal factors support like the real wealth of knowledge and skills acquired or innate potential wealth of cognitive abilities and also from external causes as the success in what they set: that’s autogenous and self-referential. Obviously, when some of these factors are acting reinforces their feelings, beliefs and assumptions: for example, a high verbal intelligence, good technical skills or a broad education.

Their passion and assertiveness can be so much that arouse admiration in other people, can instill trust and hope and do them look like true “leaders”, at least initially, especially in the people who are psychologically weaker or culturally poor, as wrote before. Other times they are so determined and certain that don’t realize that their exhibited “truths” are too conflicting with reality to be accepted. That last is the why usually, sooner or later, they are “discovered” even by the non-experts in psychology or psychiatry or criminology and are abandoned or ridiculed. In Italy we had many examples of politicians so characterized that managed initially to establish themselves to whole peoples and that ended very poorly: from Benito Mussolini to many other modern “leaders” of parties and movements.

Their inner compelling impulses to say what they think about on any idea, event, behavior, people, situation and even object and, sometimes, to intervene concretely, in arrogant or presumptuous or hyper-critical or even violent ways, is compulsive. They think that their impulses to say and intervene depend on their free discernment, generosity or heroism and aren’t aware of its compulsiveness. That shows a different origin of their presumed own free will.

They don’t have never the awareness that they are instinctively attracted by a conference in front whom exhibit themselves nor that they are excited and attracted by the “leaders” present in the scene to compete and struggle with them and try to annihilate them as their “prey”. Not only that. If you follow their life stories you can find that, after having ousted the old “leaders” and having occupied their power positions, on the basis of principled ideas before claimed, after an initial time when they act according to their showed ideas, when they begin to exert a concrete influence on the human environment, they start to pursue tangible personal purposes, feeling themselves entitled to do so because have liberated the camp from the previous “bad” or “ignorant leaders” or just by the merits arising them from their actions. That’s, after they have toke the initial relational benefits or pure power, they begin also to exploit the others people in terms of services, money, property, labor, sex, food, etc. Think on what many dictators and politicians do after they have achieved power and what many gurus, leaders of religious sects and wizards do after they have gained the trust of their faithful. .
They can act on behalf of those they perceive as weak or poor, but they then, in facts, use them unknowingly like “mirrors” on which to reflect their self-exalting and powering superiority, greatness, magnificence and magnanimity feelings. You can also notice that even their verbal activity, after an initial time, especially in adolescence, usually, it prevails over the physical, because their most profound aspiration is to dominate and be revered and served without work too! They think to can dominate and control the world by the words that they use as a sort of “smokescreens” to cover their needs and selfish interests!

Because of they think to have the exclusive possess of the truth, they are surprised and get annoyed if someone oppose and become hostile to them. Then they try to annihilate him and if they fail and / or the group chose another “leader” they leave the scene and look for another group where try to create the conditions to be the only rulers. If they act inner a group or a political party or even a whole country and think or say to do so in the interest of the same group, party or country they don’t end their destructive action of all “competitors” until they destroy all them and until in the group will be only admirers for them. If they don’t achieve these conditions, continue to attack the other members until they destroy the group, the party or the country itself! Even the recent history teach on this subject. That happens because, although they claim to act in the name of ideal values or in the interest of the group itself, in facts, they pursue one’s own interests, not certainly the collective.
That’s comparable to some “normal” people ways of thinking and doing. Think on many powerful economic-men or politic-men or even certain fathers who get annoyed when they don’t feel obeyed, respected or seconded by their subordinates or children, but wounded in their pride: the firsts try to eliminate their competitors and the seconds try to bring their children to obedience.
Differently, the true idealists people can fight for their ideas or group or represented or defended people until to give their own life!

You can find all the upper described thinking, feeling and doing ways, in less marked and manipulating ways, in the “normal people” for the evident aim of securing themselves a better survival living conditions trying to exploit an environment. You can also find that even the “normal people”, who are not masochistic, can be agree to be dominated by someone that perceive as stronger towards them in exchange for protection and safety; therefore, always for some survival purpose.

You can think even on the conception of the people on the acceptability, changeability and capriciousness of the gods to be revered, honored and ingratiate for receive some benefit from them. In the same logic, but in the side of the goods, such megalomaniacs expect to be revered and flattered, to have everything they need and want and to be even served by others people without having any obligation towards them; i.e., they expect to be almost venerated. Unlike them, the Psychotics expect to be worshiped and revered as true gods!

This author thinks that every idea of justice or fairness or politic or culture or science that such megalomaniacs firmly believe (not those used by them to steer consciously the rivals) and that they exhibit and claim it’s really useful to them primarily to exalt themselves and gain psychophysical energies for fight all competitors; secondarily to legitimize the attack on competitors; third to impose themselves in the human environment and at the end to can satisfy their concrete needs.

You can find a cinematographic synthesis of what the author writes here, in the film “Kis uykusu” (“Winter Sleep”, in English language, or “Il regno d’inverno”, in Italian), by the Turkish director Nuri Bilge Ceylan, “Palme d’or” to the Festival de Cannes in 2014, based on the novel Жена (“My wife”, in English, or “Mia moglie”, in Italian), written by Anton Cechov, in the description by the idealist and a little fanciful Nihal of the character of her husband Aydin.

This author thinks also that the ideas based on ideal principles that they exhibit, especially by words by which they are usually very skilled, are useful them to: 1) self-exaltation; 2) establish itself in the environment where they live and, simultaneously, 3) deny unconsciously to themselves, before than others, their guilty conscience. In other words, you could say that they are like mud that tries to rise morally and socially self-clinging, exhibiting and instrumentally using noble ideas!

This author hypothesizes that what is described above, at a deeper level, is primarily determined by a biological instinctive strategy for survival, similar to that of many animals, consisting in humans in seeking a human territory (some people more easy to subordinate) that is functional to their needs after had shown the “intellectual muscles” (the power of their ideas by they try to impose their domain) to be aggressively used versus any competitors in the same environment to drive them out of the human territory and remain the only rulers.

In facts, differently than “normal people”, their relations and the exchange of ideas with other people are never peaceful, open to dialogue, aimed at achieving a shared truth; but conflicting, tense, almost intimidating, sometimes threatening and infused with verbal when not even physical aggression, because consist mainly in verbal explicit or implicit attacks on the ideas of competitors, i. e. on their persons. The analyzes of reality are always done with such conviction and intellectual passion or even with such emotion and assertiveness that leaked that there are other reasons involved other than that stated from them that underlie their behavior. A careful analysis of their histories (the author has could analyze them in long times in prison and re-education institutes where he worked other than in the Psychiatry or Psychology Services where it is more difficult to meet such megalomaniacs) shows that these reasons initially consist in imposing their rule with the exhibited ideas and at the end to satisfy their concrete needs and desires.

The author observed the same phenomena also in social life: in some people working in more or less convinced ways for the purpose of protecting weaker people (see some militants of the political left) or giving wellbeing to others (see some pseudo-doctors) or spiritual purposes (see some religious leaders). Extreme examples of that ones are certain mafia bosses who exercise in Southern Italy their social influence, ostensibly to help people by an exhibited “benevolence” and “protection”, to show themselves as most benevolent and protective than the Italian State, be preferred to It, so dominate in their environment and after derive concrete benefits (money) for themselves. *

Such megalomaniacs intellectualize or rationalize their behavior to “moral duty” (i. e, a “quasi-mission”) or for their alleged “superiority” (i.e, a “quasi-omnipotence”). The Psychotics justify themselves in their delusional absolute feelings of “divine mission” or “omnipotence”. Therefor such megalomaniacs expect that the “spectators” accept their superiority, but don’t reach the levels of the psychotic delusions as, for example, in the case of the novel “Napoleon”, the “sons of emperors” or the “Presidents of U.S. A.”.
In psychodynamic analysis their descriptions of reality appear partly distorted, in instinctive or voluntary and conscious but always manipulators ways; not in bizarre ways as the Schizophrenics, but in mystifying ones that lead to their subjective truth that are quite functional to satisfy their instinctive, aggressive or erotic rulers.

With regard to their capacity of self-analysis they are not aware of their personality. They can develop a little partial awareness only if they have said or done something of very detached or disproportionate from reality and someone who is not one of their competitors does it to him note in a not-serious way. They are able to analyze the external reality more objectively, within the limits of their developed skills and acquired skills of course, only when they are calm and not involved, directly or indirectly, in domain issues of ideas or behaviors. But, their cultural and, in part, reality fitting is usually disturbed and dysfunctional for them and/or for those who are associated with them, because usually the human relations are involved in interpersonal relationships.

Example 1. One of them with the Opponent-Provocateur Secondary Disorder imposed to his original family of the South Italy to accept and appreciate a very sexy girl who, according to the local socio-cultural criteria, was not good from the moral and cultural viewpoint. He however extolled the personal qualities and demanded that the others did the same. Not only, he was egging her and other women of his acquaintance to “break free from the sexist yoke” to emancipate themselves, so performing himself as a champion of modernity, civilization and justice. He married her and left her free to meet anyone who she wanted. After some years he discovered that she was cheating on him and that one of his children was not biologically his son. Enraged because wounded in his narcissism he asked the legal divorce and charge on her the guilt. With her poor cultural means she tried to defend herself hypocritically giving to him the sins of his betrayal, both to save her social image abundantly compromised and to increase as much as possible what the judge would have awarded in money that he, according to Italian laws, had along with the house dwelling, to live with their minor children. Swaggering, he in Court, said: “As long as you leave, I’ll give you twice!”. She, well pleased to grab that extra money, stopped to playing the part of the victim and very soon accepted. Then he understood her game and added immediately: “… but I withdrawal the request for divorce and we remain separated in fact!”. The practical results for her was that she had the house and double the money asked and, moreover, she could more freely live her libertine life; the “wow” results for him was that, according to his twisted mental logic, he imposed his ideas, i.e. himself, both before and after, although in contrasting ways!

In the case above described the megalomaniac led to outcomes in counterproductive ways for himself concretely. In the other cases such megalomaniacs can be dangerous for their “followers” that are by them ideally or /and materially exploited. That happens over all with people more ignorant or deficient or psychologically weakened by the anxiety who all have less capacity to good discern the reality. You can think on many magicians, gurus, pseudo-politicians, pseudo-healers, etc., especially in less-developed countries, where they can exploit better the people credulity, to impose ideas and practices that create on the basis of approximate knowledge or basic ethical but general principles or scientific or technical or other kind to which they cling and develop in very personal ways, functional to their ambitions.

Such megalomaniacs feel similar feelings and beliefs even for their own children, friends, “partners” affective or in business or in political and, in a lesser extent, to the people related to those who are for them all a sort of psychic “extensions” of their own personality, for whom they expect and, at times, claim from the other people the same obsequiousness and reverence that they expect for themselves. I.e. they think and feel what are similar to what you can find in the projections in fantasy of Ancient Greeks on the Gods on Olympus family life, but, once again, to parts reversed.

When they or their “extensions” undergo failures they can derailed in paranoid areas and shift on the other people the responsibility, attributing hostile intent against them and becoming aggressive toward them. If the failures are severe or prolonged they can develop franc psychotic accesses usually transient. One of them developed a delirium of poisoning. They don’t realize that tend to interpret and that the hostility that they perceive against them, in facts, is the result of the projection of their own instinctive hostility toward who oppose their designs. Nor do they realize that their failures depend, fundamentally, by their excessive or inadequate claims, compared to an objective examination of reality. They aren’t even aware that their aggressive reaction is responsive to their frustrations not a “legitimate punishment” of those who oppose them!

After some paranoid accesses they tend usually to return to their usual personality structure. Others remain in stable “paranoid niches” and conserve in all other spheres of social life a good or enough adaptation.

Example 2. A politician of Sicily, in private, felt himself superior and was hyper-critical towards all whom he considered the “zeros!”. In public he acted for left-wing political ideals proclaimed that he seemed to believe strongly and, thanks to its high verbal intelligence and with his exhibitionist tendencies, he talks on religion, politics, economy and philosophy, even if he did not have sufficient knowledge, and he so annihilated the political opponents and charmed his “followers”, proved captivating and collected a good electoral success. Thanks to this success, he occupied in society positions of power that, after, in facts, he used to obtain concrete benefits for himself, his family and friends, and justified that precisely with judging others inferior and, therefore, as such, worthy of being exploited. He had no real empathic relationship with anyone, not even with his family; only intellectuals. With priests, doctors, policewomen, male and female judges he could not have even intellectual relations, because he had a total distrust of them and avoided them. In talks held with him the author has only been able to assume, without having a consensus on his part, that the exercise of power by those people from their within coats, dresses, tunics and uniforms made ambiguous them to his eyes and stimulated his distrust. The author don’t found in his personal history, which was for him satisfactory and successful, psychological factors tied into relationships of cause and effect with his chronic mistrust.

Such megalomaniacs magnify with rationalizations or intellectualization not only their ideas but even all that concerns themselves directly (things, people, cars, clothes, houses, etc.) or that concerns their “extensions”.

Example 3. The daughter of a megalomaniac who lived in a an “entourage” of graduates, while she was not-disposed to studies, obtained a modest dressmaking certificate for high fashion and he introduced that to his family and friends as a “bachelor”, after self-convinced it was worth a university degree and, of course, that she would have gained a great reputation. Then, when one of her boyfriends obtained a simple certificate of a forklift driving, he introduced him as a “diplomat”!

For them and their “extensions” they plan grandiose projects that often do not are successful because most of the time are unrealistic. In such cases, as already mentioned, they think that are victims of conspiracies or evil by other people, become aggressive toward them and hostile to those who don’t share their persecutory interpretations of the facts. If those “extensions” disappoint them they stand apart emotionally, intellectually and economically from them, disqualify or despise them and expect that others to do the same on the basis of reasons given by them. If they decide to restore the initial relationship return to exalt them and, again, they expect that others people to do the same otherwise they become hostile (expectations of uncritical sharing from others, that underlying their psychological subjection).

Example 4. One of them changed often business associates and expected that friends and relatives hail and reverenced them, even when there were not objective reasons for doing so. When they break some relation they begin to discredit and expected by the other that shares their decisions and behaviors. If he decided to restore the relations they expected that others approve and attacked them if they did not, because the “simple reason” that his decisions were always the right!

The tendency to exercise power over others and a domain on a territory is instinctive in almost all living beings belonging to the upper steps of Phylogenetic Scale and functional to survival. The “logic” of this instinct is to optimize the exploitation of resources available in the territory (In the case of humans: the material possessions, social positions, money, skills, sex, etc. of the people) as a function of their needs. In dominant animal that instinct manifests itself above all in the tendency to optimize the exploitation of the food resources and sex. In the human people obviously that phenomenon is more complex.

As already written before, the author hypothesizes that such megalomaniac traits of personality depend on a hyper-development of that instinct. In facts such megalomaniacs if decide, for example, of political deal lined up in opposition to those in power in local field or even international (against the Germans, the Americans, etc.); if the medicine, are hostile to the hospital primary or will address to alternative medicines; if psychology, denigrate the heads of school (S. Freud, M. Klein, etc.) or self-exalting fanatically adhering to their theories, almost to replace them, always to impose themselves in the area where they operate and, at the same time, cure their concrete interests.

At the same time such megalomaniacs don’t wish detach physically and mentally from their “territories” in similar ways as the male rulers of many animal species that not survive physically long time outside from their hunting grounds and sexual coupling. The diversity lies in the fact that in the animals the behavior is determined, primarily, by the biological factors and, secondarily, by the cultural ones; in such megalomaniacs the biological factors are more integrated than animals with the psychological ones (emotional, affective and cognitive) and situational, but less than in “normal people”.

Etiological affective and emotional factors different from these described above (anxiety for feelings of inferiority and inner insecurity) are acting in neurotics who eagerly criticize or judge others or give lessons on certain aspects of life or of reality and perform, for hyper-compensators unconscious purposes.

Manic aspects

An high self-esteem and an high mood are useful to all human beings to carry on the struggle for survival. In those megalomaniacs such functions are hyper-developed and occur with an high self-esteem arising from their feeling of superiority as self-exaltation.

Example 5. A policeman worked in a police station that could not fit a known dangerous Sicilian mafia. He felt himself superior to his colleagues and not spared criticism even the work of his superiors. To show them that he was able to immediately solve the problem of that mafia phoned and challenged him, at night, in plain clothes, alone, in a public square. The mafia did not turn up and the self-esteem of policeman came out strongly reinforced.

Seventeen years of experience as one of the Expert in Psychology and Criminology of the former Italian Ministry of Justice of the author suggests him that the mafia, probably, did not show up, because he feared that it was a trap agreed with Police Station to frame him or why he thought that if he had killed the policeman he would have finally given the Police a chance to catch him; not certain for a personal afraid of him! After the policeman was transferred and, of course, he thought that the disciplinary action was taken out for envy and hostility to him.

Convinced on the rightness of their ideas and the adequacy of their projects such megalomaniacs participate in person and tend to induce their “extensions” to keep lifestyles consistent with those ideas and projects; sometimes, in severe ways in terms of financial commitment, physical, mental or intellectual perseverance. As a result of repeated failures they can destabilize and to encounter transient lowering of mood. In the sudden or numerous successes, they can experience increase of mood without reaching the mania itself. In both cases, after some time, usually, they return within their typical structure of personality.


The author think that the hyper-developed instinct of dominance excites psychologically such megalomaniacs and induce in them self-exaltation and feelings of superiority, direct the activity of their brain on the direction of an urgent instinctual satisfaction and decrease, consequently, its rational activity resulting distorted even their potential critical abilities of reality and even their own self-control so that their behaviors result usually, in the long time, dysfunctional to the purpose of survival. That’s the why: 1) they express their ideas and theories in lesser, simplified and hasty ways, in confront to their own abilities and not in some high technical ways as well as the not-megalomaniac specialists; 2) they aren’t aware that their ideas about reality and, in particular, about others people are distorted by that process; 3) they aren’t aware on their fallibility and partiality and 4) their consequent behaviors are many times too aggressive or tactless. That’s the why even that 5) their consequent behaviors are, above all, based on partial truths or little scientific knowledge or moral principles easily shared but generic and vague or, sometimes, on entirely personal childish ideas to which they give absolute values overtime in convincing ways up on which they built their theories. On the bases of these premises, 6) they discredit or criminalize and attack their competitors that they perceive and convincingly hurt as “wrongdoers” or “bad” people in equally arbitrary and usually unfounded and without awareness ways.

They are not aware of the biologic origin of that process that is ego-syntonic and self-rewarding. They are aware of their behavior disparaging the others and challenging the leaders present in the scene. For some sadistic or sexual aspects of it, too degrading and reprehensible according to common morality, they resort to various defense mechanisms from anxiety already seen before.

When they discover that they are unprepared or in a too straight line with reality, 7) they do not hesitate, even in conscious and awareness ways, to reformulate their ideas or to review their behaviors or to attempt to manipulate others’ perceptions of reality always in order to continue to impose themselves, for their unshakable belief that they are, however, the most capable or the best and, as such, deserving to dominate and have what they want or need. 8) They don’t have even the awareness that their behaviors are destroying their interpersonal relationships, both because they are too discrediting and aggressive, even when they say that they act for altruistic goals or for the interests of the groups where they operate; except the relationship with those who accept them as “leaders” and in facts submit themselves to them.

Emotional aspects

Such megalomaniacs when are upset give the image of superiority of himself and remain self-controlled, joking, serene, mature, rational, detached, balanced, top quality or they use slogan or a language persuasive or aggressive or vehement or they are conceited or sarcastic. Only in private they do “outing” of their budget contempt of all those who are their “competitors” or, simply, who aren’t their “followers”. They don’t experience feelings of guilt either because the “simple why” that they feel themselves as always right and never wrong and because their impulses determine feelings and thoughts of greatness that occupy their entire emotional and intellectual sphere. Even when they are sentenced for riot offenses or fraud or defamation of the institutions or for circumvention of an incapable or criminal association or exchange of votes or bribery they give reasons for their actions and don’t admit mistakes. When they feel hurt their “majesty” they develop hostility and become vengeful. More than deny their misdeeds, as tend to do the Antisocial, they tend to somehow to rationalize or intellectualize starting always from the assumption that their work was the right. Even when themselves or their “extensions” undergo setbacks they don’t feel failure because, as already wrote, “the fault is of others”. They don’t feel never afraid because they “are too wonderful for everyone, for having to be afraid” (used also the defense mechanism of denial: see Example 5).
However, they are not totally inhumane and alienated from the empathetic relations. They can experience feeling of guilt, for example, if they accomplished serious actions against someone who is now dead.

Affective aspects

They have a personal immaturity on the bottom (which in various ways characterize all Personality Disorders, due to the structural and functional imbalances of the Neuro-Endocrine System, which don’t allow an harmonious maturation and consequently nor an harmonic and balanced development of the personality) that you can see in their free imaginations or in their privacy only, with their preferred friends and “partners”: then they can show themselves in adolescent or in childish ways. In most part of other cases they placed themselves on a superiority floors also in front to their friends and “partners”, especially towards strangers. That’s the why their emotional relations are never matching with the truth in pubblic.

All of their human relations are almost never authentic and empathic (see Example 2). Even the relations with their “extensions” are held mainly on the basis of the big ideas and plans that cultivate and share. For them don’t exist neither family, but “extensions”, “followers”, “competitors” or “protected-mirrors” only. They have no regard to others people especially to their “competitors” that stigmatize negatively (in fact because they opposed their domain designs) and that, in their opinion, deserve to be not considered.

Moral aspects

As it’s written above when such megalomaniacs are troubled by others who point out the not-correspondence of what they said or written with the reality they resort to mystifications of reality itself: they deliberately and consciously occur manipulations convenience of the truth or even to real falsehood. Usually they don’t feel the guilt because are convinced of their ideas. In the other cases they don’t feel guilt either because they feel themselves entitled to do so by perceiving others as “bad” or “inferior” or “wrong” and therefore worthy to be deceived or manipulated. They are also tactless and don’t take into account the other’s sensitivity or the circumstances where they are involved nor the formality either because their impulses prevail over the rational evaluations of the opportunities and they start from assumptions that others are “blasphemous” or “bad” or “ignorant” or “corrupt” and feel them entitled to lack of respect toward them. That’s the why they often don’t maintain even their word or stipulated accords. The Opponents-Provocateurs do that with “authoritative” figures that disqualify or misinterpreted or delegitimize in various ways. Even the Antisocials don’t feel the guilt because they perceive others as “incapable” or “weak” and therefore worthy of being deceived or defrauded. The author hypothesizes that the last, differently than megalomaniacs, if aren’t influenced by some psychological (like the case n. 10) or cultural (like some Gypsies) or neurological (like some people with frontal lobes damaged) factors, they have an hyper-developed predator instinct of survival.


With regard to their own health they care much more their clothing and their dialectic, for showoff, as a weapon to overpower others, than their mental and physical health, because the latest two activities imply the submission to the knowledge and, therefore, to the power of others (doctors, scientists, etc.) that, as we already had seen, go versus their instinctive tendencies!
Except in cases of serious illness, they prefer to do themselves, convinced that they don’t need any help or be able to do better than the doctors or resort to alternative officers healing methods or knowledge.


The use of various possible psychic defense mechanisms by such megalomaniacs, the denial and projection especially, causes them a partial alienation from reality. In facts, they feel a superiority that, as we have seen, empathize them emotionally from others people altering their human relations; that they develop the conviction to be able to can control, manipulate and dominate other people in their own liking, especially with dialectics, and that they develop the underlying conception of a world “malleable” according to their needs and wishes. In “normal” people usually it happens the contrary: the real world, through experience and learning, “builds” their personality, their sense of Self and the knowledge (“culture”) in interacting with their potential hereditary genetic baggage (“ure”). In such megalomaniacs over all in the psychotic megalomaniacs, usually you observe an inversion of such a relationship: they are “determining” their abilities and “building” the world. In this sense, one can speak of “alienation from reality”.
It is a vague term that can be used for all psychic disorders, especially for psychoses. This author thinks that it’s appropriate even to such megalomaniacs, in qualitative rather than quantitative terms. In fact, their alienation from reality manifests itself 1) with their beliefs and their attitude of superiority, both subjective and difficult to reduce; 2) with their truths and dogmatic judgments, equally subjective and difficult to come to reality; 3) both with the consequent alteration of their human coexistence (Mit-sein); 4) with a more general alteration of their existence-in-the-world (Dasein) and 5) with an alteration of their world experience (Erlebnis).


Many of them are magicians, gurus, witches, fortune tellers and pseudo-therapists who believe to have special skills; others of them do the politicians who think they can easily manipulate the electorate by chatter; others psychiatrists, doctors and psychologists who think to follow new methods of investigation and treatment designed from them and don’t comply protocols; or philosophers, teachers, educators and animal breeders who have their questionable visions of educational methods and breeding; or some mafia who think to have the duty to impose their “right order” on socio-cultural environment where they live, for a kind of mission of which they feel invested, even against the laws of the state; or writers and poets or blacksmiths and carpenters who are planning to create true works of literary or art materials; or inventors who patent ideas of a some use, but which in reality are not important and innovative as they think.

Their ideas and behaviors contrast the common sense or the directives of the scientific communities and they live more or less well integrated into the civilian societies without having to resort to the use of psychotropic drugs, unlike the Psychotic.

Differential diagnosis from some other psychological disorders

All people, even the “normal”, try to create around them an environment where to find safety useful for their psychological, social and physic survival. In those with dominant characteristics of personality that happens in more accentuated, strong, pervasive ways than average of “normal”, in more or less effectiveness and efficiency depending on their capacity, but more rational and realistic and then functional to the purpose of survival than the megalomaniacs. In those last that happens in distorted, excessive, difficult to correct, repeated, culturally transgressive, verbally or physically aggressive and usually dysfunctional ways as illustrated above. Differently to what happens among them the “normal” people exchanges their ideas, can be conflicting, but remaining aware that they can do mistakes and that the others ideas are to be respected. The megalomaniacs, instead, are surprised if others have different ideas from them, don’t use respect and attack “a priori” it. They marvel even if others, after being attacked by them, fight back or get offended them on certain topics of discussion or behaviors. That tendency to excel over others common such Megalomaniacs to Narcissist, Antisocials, Mythomaniacs, Histrionics and other psychologically disordered people.

Some differences lie in the fact that, according to the first, it’s more than sufficient what they feel in themselves; to the fourth it’s necessary resort to tales of alleged participation in fantastic events “mediators” and special that magnify them and make them unique to the ears of others. Both, if aren’t real studious, don’t investigate the reality with shared methods accepted by the relevant scientific community. Both differ from Psychotics to the fact that those latter are more dominated by their delusions and more alienated from reality and their claims and truths are less connected with the reality. That’s the why they can worse control their thoughts, to fit their behaviors and care their interests and undergo further failures. The Megalomaniacs instead tend more actively than Psychotics and Mythomaniacs to create around them a more extensive and concrete stalls of “followers” (the “territory”) where to exercise some kind of domain (political, economic, intellectual, etc.) and after derive real benefits. But, at the time, also they resort to the use of alleged participation to fantastic events, for the purpose aforesaid.

Example 6. A megalomaniac, after initial free-professional successes that exalted psychologically and realized actually him, had a long period of economic failures and, for a compensatory purposes, already convinced of the existence of UFOs, he began to say to have found it (the UFO, at that time, were a subject of great social interest).

Example 7. His brother, however, civil servant, womanizer and pathological liar, told the same experiences of encounters with extra-terrestrials, sentimental adventures non-existent and others.

If such megalomaniacs perceive some competitors in the environment tend to annihilate or remove them from their fields of activity revealing antagonism and antipathy that common them to the Opponents-Provocateurs. The Mythomaniacs, however, are disappointed if others people don’t believe their fantastic tales and try to return to the office with the same or other stories in an attempt to convince the “audience” that they try to dominate exciting and charming by fantastic inventions that exhibit in order to decorate their person, positively or negative, but always in magnificent ways.

Example 8. In criminology are frequent the cases of Mythomaniacs that self-accuse of serious crimes that arouse the public’s interest; not of minor crimes.

For the same why the Megalomaniacs tend to fight the power-men (judges, police, military, religious, teachers) and the socio-cultural rules, including the common sense; especially if they associate traits Opponents-Provocateurs. The Histrionics, unlike them and similarly to Mythomaniacs, try to grasp what are the ways of thinking of others, groped to gratify it and so win their sympathies, similarly to actors in front of spectators who try to transform into “clackers”, overcoming any “competitors” on the plan of the jokes. They are successful in this way in the environments where they are able to achieve what they aspire.

Example 9. The author known a Histrionic that performing in certain ways in keeping with the environment of the Lions Club and in completely different ways in very different environments from the first.

The Megalomaniacs present some aspects of Antisocial Personality Disorder: both tend to oust all of (the former) or the powerful (the second) of their property or of their power. The Antisocials feel of being more physically stronger and smarter than others that they judge “deserving to be exploited or dispossessed” of their material properties by fraud or physical violence, aware that it is illegitimate or illegal. However, the Megalomaniacs believe that they can do it because they are from part of the reason, the just, the good. The Antisocials tend to have more challenging behavior on the physical plane; the Megalomaniacs, more intellectually or even purely verbal.

The Narcissists think and act in similar ways than the Megalomaniacs: they are more focused on the search for perfection, style, scharm and sophistication according to local cultural partners’ canons and feel entitled in perceiving others as “imperfect” to be admired and to dominate in this way.

Unlike the Psychotics, who develop delusions or hallucinations and can integrated in the civil society only with the help of psychiatric care, the Megalomaniacs, because don’t develop mental disorders that alienate them much more from reality, can do it without.

From this viewpoint we could talk of “aborted psychosis” or “psychosis in a nutshell” or “intermediate” between normality and insanity? The hyper-development of domain and aggression instincts cause tendencies to manipulate others and the truth, just to reach the aim to dominate and to derive benefits even resulting socio-cultural and sometimes legal conflicts with other people. This author believes that such disorder is to be classified as Personality Disorders.

When the mental and behavioral frameworks described before are in young people or adults, in acute ways, or in elderly or old life, in contrasting ways with their previous life stories, you can think that it is the effects of chemical or physical trauma or substances psychic, in the first two cases, or dementia or senile involution, in third case.

Possible etiology

If you think on their resistance to the cultural pressure, the ego-syntonic of their feelings of superiority, the tendency to impose their pulses on their reason, the usual independence of such feelings from real supportive inner and external cognitive or reality factors, the automatism of their antagonism toward the competitors, the frequent familiarity in stories of their relatives and the not common external situational factors in relation of cause and effect with their behaviors (childhood experiences with authoritarian figures are common to ordinary people), you can think that the megalomaniac traits impregnate the personality in repeated and pervasive ways by a genetic base and constitute a personality disorder when it aren’t a psychosis or a rare case of neurosis as the next example.

Example 10. As already mentioned the author, among his many professional activities, he was one of the Experts in Psychology and Criminology of the Italian State, in Sicily, for the Courts of Appeal of Palermo and Caltanissetta, to relate the Judges Supervisory about the personalities of the detainees who had instances for alternative benefits to the detention. One of them was the son of a mafia boss (life imprisoned in another prison) who had a thick criminal file, for extortion and that, before entering the Gozzini law into force in Italy, he had also organized riots in jail. He entered in his Office with arrogant ways and sure of himself, looking into his eyes in challenging ways. Contrary to the usual behavior of boss mobsters he defiantly admitted all the crimes debited to him and justified himself by saying that the victims “deserved it” and that the Prison Administration “was ill prisoners”.
He came even to beat his fist on the table of the examiner, so obvious demonstration, and he spoke in a loud voice, so obvious that hear who was crossing out of the office door that he had no awe toward the examiner. But during his “performance”, his forehead was drenched in sweat, he was still in his chair and was restless. He boasted of having the city at his feet (after having taken the place of his father: n. o. a.) (demonstration of magnitude) and have “many picciotti (gangsters)” under his command (display of power) “to execute for him what he want” (examiner warning).
In the second interview he presented himself in a less defiant way: sometimes he crossed his arms and in other not-knew where to keep it, sometimes he supported the examiner look and sometimes curved, sometimes it was right on his back and other times curved. These behaviors were all unusual for a mafia boss: his body language was saying different things than verbal. The examiner decided then to administer him the Rorschach Test.
He gave a more answers than the average of prisoners (especially the mafia give very little answers or refuse to submit to the test). Among them he gave the answers “Angels”, “Church”, “Devils”, “Inferno”. Two were ChoF and three FCho. He also had a shock to red followed by a response F+, he took one DBI only and sufficient answers U.
It was clear for the examiner that there was a contrast between his manifested personality and the occult.
During the following talks the examiner tried to get through to them and talk about his life as a child and young. He told that it had been very troubled because of his father treated him harshly and hurts him in his vanity (he considered him “unu smammanicutu ” in Sicilian language; i.e, an individual devoid of backbone, with a weak character, incapable, unworthy of esteem), until he began to do what his father expected from him.
It was easy for the examiner to interpret his style change life and the denial of its original ways of being as an attempt to gain the father’s esteem and heal her wounded narcissism. He accepted and since then stopped definitively exhibit the boss style.
Later he added that he was very regretted the life he had done until then. The examiner believed him but before to draft a report favorable to the Supervisory Judge he wanted to submit him to another practical test. In Sicily only the small offenders agree to do in prison the work for “toilet brush”, which is to clean the floor and collect the requests of other prisonners to have cigarettes or other. Accept it only those whose families are in poor economic conditions, in order to earn something to send at home. In disqualifying ways them are called “scassapagliari” (from burglars haystacks) or “chicken thieves”. The examiner suggested him that job and he accepted it!
The other detainees were incredulous: they did not know whether to despise or think that he simulated his changes, in order to have the benefit to which he aspired. The custodial agents on duty in ”area-talks” reported that, after his above changes, disagreements arose between him and his family who came to visit him in prison. Then the examiner had no more doubt and decided to relate favorably to the Judge.
The latter, amazement also, rejected the request of the detainee, because the social worker and the internal team of the Prison (the Director, the Marshal who cured the order within and the Educator who cared rehabilitative activities) related him all negatively.
Strangely, at the time, the author had the reputation of being “tough” in these Prisons because most of his reports were unfavorable while those of the other members of the internal team were favorable.
On the third try the judge decided to trust him and release the detainee granted day. After his release he began self-cleaning work, did not create problems and the black chronicles not occupied anymore.
It occupied instead about the Director that, a few years later, committed suicide; the Marshal that, after a few more years, was indicted for criminal association, and the Educator who, after more years, was dismissed for committed other crimes!

Differently than Neuroses and the Psychoses the author hypothesizes that the features mentioned above are primarily due to aggressive and, if necessary, destructive impulses for domain determined by a hyper-developed part (also the megalomaniacs women that author known presented psychophysical male characteristics) of Neuro-Endocrine System genetically inherited. Such impulses, not rational nor aware, but fused and confused with rational, conscious and voluntary activity of the cortex, unbalance quantitatively in excess the instinctive survival functions for dominance and qualitatively the reasoning of the Megalomaniacs leading them to dysfunctional ideations and behaviors compared to the original purpose of survival. Obviously, other inherited genes, the individual history, the potential cognitive, environmental and situational factors interact and diversify all them.

The possible “core” of the disorders

The features above described are traits of personality that don’t occur in identical ways in all them, because the genetic factors are integrated with many other possible cultural and situational and make so that no a megalomaniac is identical to another. However between them you can seize a common “core”: 1) egosyntonic superiority feelings and consequent expectance to excel and dominate; 2) view of the world and truths to which they believe or handle or use as handholds or pretexts and that 3) exhibit to legitimize their expectations; 4) a deficiency or absence of empathy and tact and 5) tendency to annihilate or at least to compete with competitors to 6) create around them a living or working environment more or less broad, functional to their aspirations and, at the end, 7) to the satisfactions of their concrete needs with 8) resulting socio-cultural and, sometimes, even legal conflicts.


As the Psychotics the Megalomaniacs, albeit in less heavy ways, often end poor their lives or lives alone, as result of their inability to better manage the money and the interpersonal relations consequent to their disorder. Other times they taking advantage of the credulity or the rudeness of people attending or the ignorance or the anxiety coming from their urgent needs and they become rich and powerful or are considered saints or benefactors. Other times when clash with certain power-men they can end up exiled or imprisoned or killed. Can be that’s the case of many alleged prophets or saints or revolutionaries.


Precisely because they are able to live in society without pharmacotherapy hardly they don’t come to psychiatric services, except in rare cases. It’s more likely to be found them in prisons or in educational institutes, for violating rules or laws. On the other hand, precisely because they believe to be healthy and superior to others people, very difficult they cater to a psychotherapist to ask for help; unless they are lot destabilized after a long series of failures and after having reached the ripe old age when their instinctive impulses are partially muffled or undergo mental deterioration that causes a less of ability to rationalize or intellectualize their tendencies as before wrote and it’s more evident to not-psychiatrists and not-psychologists who push them to be examined by experts or undergo frank psychotic access or to depression of mood.

Ethologic aspects

The self-aggrandizement and any tendency to dominate, the instinctive aversion to competitors and the attempts to annihilate them psychologically or even physically, the attempts to impose their system of ideas and interpersonal relationships at the cost of the manipulation the truth, functional to their ambitions, interests and concrete needs, appears to the author similar to that of many animals belonging to the upper steps of Phylogenetic Scale which tend to delimit the areas in which dominate to the fundamental purpose of utilizing the resources available in it, reorder and optimize it, depending on their needs for survival. Obviously the strategies observed in the animal are lied more directly to the relationship, sex and food; in the human it’s relative also to psychological and more complex social organizations. The author thinks that the behavioral components bad-working in the Megalomaniacs in the civil society, as well as that of all the Personality Disorders, are the effect of neurological and hormonal abnormalities hyper-inducing instinctive behaviors for domain and control on the environment bad-integrated with the rational activity of their brain. This contrasts with the request to them to a more appropriate behavior to the dominant culture in their environment and, this is the why, in the course of time, usually, it result dysfunctional to the original survival purpose.


Natural phenomena including the humans have more concrete origins than these who often attribute some psychologists and philosophers.
As have noted the psychoanalysts, in the childhood life can act an original narcissistic fixation or strong subjective frustrations of emotional needs of acceptance that determine megalomania. In the adolescence life can act strong offenses of the self-image which can escape again in the neonatal narcissism, by the defense mechanisms of denial and projection, regaining so the reassuring feeling of omnipotence.
As have noted the psychologists it can also happen that some people are induced to do so by threatening and objectives situational factors and, thanks to strengths factors of their personality, they can use the confidence in themselves and in their abilities, to control the anguish and face those factors. They also found that can act the original relational experiences with caregivers. Even the environments that hyper-gratify the children and adolescents can promote narcissistic detachment as previous hyper-compensation that removes the stains to the original one.

These own very different observations demonstrate at least that there isn’t a common psychological factor for the megalomania. The author in his experience has rarely found psychologic factors (as in the n. 10 case) in the (pseudo-) megalomaniacs and has met some of them with original rewarding experiences of life and others with frustrating.
At the psycoclinic observation and anamnesis, he found that their fantasies of greatness spring from ego-syntonic feelings of superiority and power that, in most cases, are formed “a priori”, in auto-producted ways, independent of situational factors. He also noted often familiarity. In the case n. 10 the boss was certainly gratified by the power he had acquired and the reverence that others had for him. But the superiority and the wickedness that he has exhibited in interpersonal relationships were reactive to situational neurotics and ego-dystonic factors; so much so, after the psychological treatment, he has returned to be the same as before. That’s the why the author thinks on mostly constitutional determinant or, at least, co-determinant factors in most forms of the megalomania.

It is a largely hypothetic interpretation and it needs to be supported by scientific evidence. Therefore, the author is aware that he not have “revealed” the causes of these disorders. He hopes to have approached or have path in this short essay at least parallele to the reality and to have pointed a road for the neuro-endocrinological and genetic researches.

This article was presented at the 15th European Congress of Psychologists, which took place in Amsterdam, 11-14 July 2017. https://www.eiseverywhere.com/eom/221918/558456/


* The indigenous people are more ignorant (they don’t realize that accepting protection from a mobster, in the long run, it will cost them and to the whole community more than to accept the merits and defects of the State laws) or culturally outdated (people who think and act according to ancient cultural behavioral patterns dictated by centuries-old historical tradition and real that perceive the dominant peoples coming from different lands of Southern Italy, as the Italian State that they many times confuse with the Government, who only coming to exploit them and that the only way to defend themselves is self-organize secretly around a strong local leader who brings order and imparts justice: a mobster) or in need of aid (a job, some protection from someone, the safety that can result from being part of a strong organization, the wish to make a good life without work, the wish to enrich easily, etc.).

22. Luglio 2017 · Commenti disabilitati su Gli antichi fattori ambientali e storici della moderna cultura olandese. Una analisi etologica ed una prospettiva psicoculturale. The ancient environmental and historical factors of the modern Dutch culture. An ethological viewpoint and a psychocultural perspective. The English traslation is after the Italian. · Categorie:Menu

Nel 2015 i danni causati in Italia dagli Hooligans del Feyenoord alla “Fontana della Barcaccia”, raffinata ed originale opera artistica del 1629, opera di Pietro e Gian Lorenzo Bernini, in prezioso travertino, situata in Piazza di Spagna, sotto Trinità dei Monti, a Roma, in occasione della partita di calcio di Europa League contro la locale squadra della Roma, sono stati unanimemente considerati degli atti di inciviltà, al punto da far gridare al critico d’arte Vittorio Sgarbi che essi non sono ricompensabili con denaro.

Tali atti accomunano i tifosi della squadra di Rotterdam a quelli di tante altre squadre di tutto il Mondo ivi comprese quelle italiane: aggressioni ai tifosi avversari (i “nemici” diretti), violenza contro macchine in sosta, contro vetrine di negozi, etc. (aggressività generica da frustrazione dislocata su oggetti casuali che capitano a tiro). Ciò accade, specialmente, in occasioni di sconfitte della squadra del cuore, allorquando le violenze costituiscono scarichi generici di aggressività generata dalla frustrazione per la sconfitta. Ma mai si era assistito, prima di allora, ad atti di violenza volontaria e consapevole perpetrata in massa contro un monumento di valore artistico o storico. Tutt’al più, era già successo che dei tifosi ubriachi hanno lasciato dentro delle fontane o sopra dei monumenti bottiglie o lattine o che dei singoli pazzi deliranti od allucinati li hanno danneggiati o che dei maleducati vi hanno inciso iscrizioni o che vi sono saliti sopra per scattare delle foto o che dei ladri ne hanno rubato dei pezzi. Nel caso della “Barcaccia”, la celebre rappresentazione artistica scultorea della “barca che affonda” dei due scultori italiani, l’aggressività è stata diretta contro qualcosa che è una parte della ricchezza quantitativa e qualitativa del patrimonio artistico italiano che non ha uguali nel Mondo, non per merito di noi italiani di oggi che non lo sappiamo neanche salvaguardare e custodire e valorizzare bene (fatta eccezione della gestione dei Beni Culturali e Turismo dell’attuale Ministro Dario Franceschini), ma dei nostri predecessori, e che lo rappresenta. Qualcosa di simile a ciò che accade a certi manifestanti di estrema sinistra politica che, durante i cortei di protesta, scaricano la loro aggressività generata dall’odio contro i “capitalisti”, non a caso, ma su oggetti-simbolo del capitalismo: le vetrine delle banche e dei negozi di lusso, le automobili di grossa cilindrata, etc.; cioè, contro simboli del benessere e dei soldi che loro non hanno e che vorrebbero avere, o della mafia siciliana che negli Anni ’90 aveva organizzato attentati contro monumenti-simbolo dello Stato Italiano, per indurlo a cedere alle sue minacce. In tali casi, se i danneggiamenti non sono studiati e programmati, allo scopo di attirare i riflettori dei mass media su un problema di interesse pubblico, essi sono mossi dall’invidia (dei soldi dei capitalisti, nel caso di certi dimostranti di sinistra; del potere, nel caso della mafia; della ricchezza artistica ed intellettuale, nel caso degli Olandesi) e seguono un pensiero inconscio del tipo: “Io non posso avere quello che avete voi ed, allora, non lo dovete avere neanche voi!”.
Secondo questo autore, che ha viaggiato e soggiornato in Olanda tante volte, l’aggressività degli Hooligans di Rotterdam è stata mossa da simili fattori ed è stata specifica.
Gli Olandesi, per la situazione geografica dove vivono, hanno sviluppato nel corso dei secoli grandi abilità tecniche ed organizzative marinaresche e portuali, prima; commerciali, dopo, ed anche sociali, più di recente. Per la loro posizione geografica, hanno potuto viaggiare in mari lontani, così come altri popoli che si affacciano sull’Atlantico (v. Inglesi, Francesi, Portoghesi, Spagnoli), più facilmente di altri e più facilmente hanno potuto scoprire nuove terre e popoli. Si è trattato per lo più di popoli appartenenti al Sud del Mondo, meno sviluppati ed organizzati di loro, ma più ricchi in oro, diamanti, argento ed oggetti di valore artistico ed, in qualche caso, anche in filosofia della vita, verso i quali hanno sviluppato invidia psicologicamente dolorosa che hanno soddisfatto, prima, scambiando le ricchezze materiali di tali popoli con le proprie più scarse di valore economico e artistico e soprattutto con la propria tecnologia certamente più elevata (trasformandosi così da abili marinai in abili commercianti); poi, prendendole con la violenza militare (ritrasformandosi anche in abili invasori-dominatori) e, più di recente, offrendo posti di lavoro di bassa manovalanza ad alto rischio e/od a basso salario a quelle popolazioni in Olanda ed ospitalità fiscale agevolata a grandi aziende (trasformandosi definitivamente in sfruttatori sistematici).
Così, sfruttando le proprie maggiori iniziali capacità tecniche ed organizzative, che hanno dovuto sviluppare, proprio per sopravvivere alle più avverse condizioni climatiche nelle quali sono vissuti, hanno migliorato le loro condizioni di sopravvivenza trasformandosi da abili marinai in colonialisti e passando da una strategia di sopravvivenza basata sulle attività marinare e sul lavoro proprio ad una basata sullo sfruttamento del lavoro e delle ricchezze altrui. Contestualmente a ciò hanno trasformato i loro sentimenti d’inferiorità intellettuale e morale sviluppando una cultura caratterizzata da atteggiamenti di superiorità economica e sociale nei confronti di quei Popoli (tra i quali, l’Italia) che consente loro di evitare il dolore dell’invidia e da un retro-pensiero razionalizzante del tipo: “Sono degli stupidi e, come tali, meritano di essere sfruttati”. Cioé, hanno sviluppato una idea di superiorità di se stessi in relazione a quelle popolazioni che ne auto-legittima lo sfruttamento e la depredazione con scarso o nessun rispetto verso di loro. Tale senso di superiorità è tale che, a volte, li porta ad essere arroganti od a pensare di potere facilmente ingannare quelle persone dando pochissimo per avere in cambio moltissimo od a pensare di poterli facilmente abbindolare con le chiacchiere od a fare proposte oscene sempre allo scopo di poterli depredare dei loro beni materiali. Inoltre, all’interno del loro Paese, ad imitazione dei nobili e dei commercianti che si sono arricchiti con lo sfruttamento suddetto e che sono vissuti negli agi senza troppo faticare fisicamente, hanno anche sviluppato una cultura che valorizza, soprattutto, il denaro e le proprietà (beni materiali) ed il desiderio di vivere sfruttando i beni ed il lavoro altrui standosene comodamente seduti su una poltrona a comandare altri che lavorano, dando in cambio il meno possibile per ricavare il più possibile (profitto). Sempre ad imitazione dei nobili, hanno anche sviluppato modi di fare signorili “en surface”, simili a quelli inglesi (altri colonialisti d’eccellenza), che nascondono i loro reali atteggiamenti egoistici e predatori. Poco spazio hanno riservato ai sentimenti ed ai valori ideali. Persino la loro arte è improntata prevalentemente a realismo: essa ha ben poco di fantastico, di romantico, di sentimentale, di ideale.
Se il retro-pensiero suddetto serve loro a legittimare la loro azione predatoria e ad evitare sensi di colpa, i contestuali sentimenti di superiorità e di arroganza assolvono ad un’altra funzione: le migliori strategie di sopravvivenza necessitano, oltre che di un “territorio” da sfruttare (nel caso in questione, le colonie ed i colonizzati), anche di energie psichiche e fisiche per poterlo fare al meglio. Ebbene, quelle fisiche le ricavano dal cibo che mangiano e quelle psichiche le ricavano dall’innalzamento dell’umore che deriva loro da quei sentimenti di superiorità. E’ facilmente intuibile, anche da parte dei non esperti, che i sentimenti di legittimità liberano dai freni inibitori che causerebbero dei sensi di colpa, i sentimenti di superiorità danno energia psichica ed ambedue aumentano le “chances” di successo nella lotta per la sopravvivenza!
E’ verosimile che tutto questo non è dipeso solo da fattori circostanziali e psichici, ma anche da fattori stenici della loro personalità. Nelle condizioni climatiche e geografiche avverse nelle quali l’antico popolo Dutch è vissuto sono sopravvissuti gli individui più forti fisicamente e psicologicamente e, quindi, meglio predisposti a sviluppare quei sentimenti.
In sintesi, alti livelli tecnologici e logistici applicati al commercio, alla finanza ed al lavoro in generale e bassi livelli etici ed ideali.
Naturalmente, i tifosi del Feyenoord non sono venuti a Roma, per impossessarsi della “Barcaccia” né per distruggerla, ma per vedere vincere la loro squadra di calcio su quella locale. La sconfitta deve avere causato loro un senso comune di frustrazione da senso d’inferiorità che si è trasformato istintivamente in tensione ed aggressività. La vista della “Barcaccia” e dei tanti altri monumenti romani deve avere rimobilitato un secondo senso di frustrazione da senso d’inferiorità artistica e culturale che si è trasformato in altra tensione ed aggressività che hanno dislocato, non a caso e non su vetrine od automobili, simboli del capitalismo che loro stessi rappresentano, ma su un simbolo di quella “italianità” che volevano sconfiggere calcisticamente e che già da tempo li tiene sotto smacco artisticamente e culturalmente: appunto, la “Barcaccia”.
La sequenza psichica, favorita dalla canalizzazione degli istinti aggressivi che consente il gioco del calcio (che, per questo, contribuisce ad evitare guerre reali) deve essere stata del tipo: “spedizione” a Roma, per sconfiggere il “nemico” >>> imprevista sconfitta >>> frustrazione >>> senso d’inferiorità >>> conseguenti aggressività e tensione psicofisica >>> necessità di riequilibrare lo stato psicofisico così alterato scaricandole all’esterno >>> impossibilità di scaricarle direttamente sul “nemico ” >>> associazione Squadra di calcio della Roma – Roma Capitale d’Italia – Italia ricca di monumenti – monumento della “Barcaccia” simbolo d’Italia >>> pensiero comune: “Non possiamo sconfiggerli calcisticamente e non possiamo avere le loro proprietà e allora non li avranno neanche loro!” >>> vendetta distruttiva su quello che è capitato loro più facilmente a tiro: la “Barcaccia”.
Per le antiche popolazioni ed, ancora oggi, nel nostro inconscio sconfiggere un nemico significa ucciderlo o renderlo schiavo od, almeno, depredarlo in modo surrogatorio delle sue proprietà.
Ovviamente, non tutti gli olandesi condividono tali pensieri e sentimenti e non tutti coloro che li provano e che vengono in Italia, cercano di deturpare i monumenti. Ma, in occasioni di forti tensioni dovute ad altri motivi (rivalità tra tifosi, interessi economici o fattori emozionali vari) o quando si agisce in grandi gruppi o si è ubriachi quei pensieri vengono disinibiti e l’aggressività ad essi connessa viene scaricata contro le mancate prede od i loro averi!
Altrettanto ovvio che i fatti di Roma sono stati solo una delle manifestazioni dei suddetti modi di pensare. infatti, non è un caso che alla richiesta di risarcimento dei danni avanzata dal Governo Italiano quello Olandese ha risposto picche e non è un caso nemmeno che, come ogni regola che ha le sue eccezioni, la signora Elisabeth Jane Bertrand, vergognandosi dei suoi connazionali, si è impegnata a raccogliere 100.000,00 euro, più che per risarcire i danni alla “Barcaccia” e per riparare la grave falla della dignità olandese. Peccato che non è riuscita a raccoglierli! Alcuni studenti olandesi hanno sì raccolto 3.200,00 euro, ma, poi, si sono presentati in massa a consegnarli in Italia, ospiti delle istituzioni pubbliche italiane…guadagnando una bella vacanza collettiva!
Gli Olandesi, dal punto di vista tecnico e sociale sono certamente più civili della media delle popolazioni del Sud del Mondo, perché meglio organizzati e più efficienti come Stato. Ma, dal punto di vista dei valori umani (gli affetti, la famiglia, l’amicizia, il diritto, la generosità, la solidarietà, l’altruismo, etc.) hanno molto da imparare da quei Paesi molti dei quali (tra questi l’Italia) sono stati fonti di civiltà nei secoli passati e fondano ancora oggi le loro società prevalentemente su principi etici. Da tali ultimi punti di vista, gli attuali eredi del popolo Dutch sono ancora proprio degli incivili. Lo hanno dimostrato anche a Szebrenica, in occasione dell’ultima guerra nei Balcani del 1999, dove i soldati olandesi si comportarono in maniera egoistica tradendo la loro missione internazionale: si sono infischiati degli eccidi che accadevano nel loro territorio di competenza e, non a caso, per quello, l’Olanda fu poi condannata dal Tribunale Internazionale dell’Aja!

The violence of the Feyenoord supporters in Rome and the Dutch culture.
An Ethological Analysis

In 2015 the damage caused in Italy by the Feyenoord Hooligans to the “Fontana della Barcaccia”, a refined and original artistic work of 1629, by Pietro and Gian Lorenzo Bernini, in precious travertine, located in Piazza di Spagna, under Trinità dei Monti, in Rome, on the occasion of the Europa League soccer match against the local Roma team, have been unanimously considered acts of uncivilization, to the point that the art critic Vittorio Sgarbi screamed that they are not rewarded with money.

Those acts share the Rotterdam supporters with those of many other teams around the world, including the Italian ones: aggression against opponents (the direct “enemies”), violence against cars, shop windows, etc. (generic aggressiveness from frustration on random objects). This happens especially in the defeats of the team of the heart, when violence is a general discharging of aggression caused by frustration for defeat. But never before had witnessed acts of voluntary and conscious violence perpetrated by many people against a monument of artistic or historical value. Most of all, it had already happened that drunken fans had left in the fountains or other monuments bottles or cans or that some crazy individuals not in the full of their senses had damaged them or that some rude people have incurred inscriptions or climbed up to take pictures or that thieves stole some pieces.
In the case of the “Barcaccia”, the famous sculptural artistic representation of the “boat sinking” of the two Italian sculptors, the aggression has been directed against something that is a part of the quantitative and qualitative richness of the Italian artistic heritage that has no equal In the World, not for us today’s Italians who do not even know how to well safeguard and preserve and value (except for the management of the Cultural Heritage and Tourism of the current Minister Dario Franceschini), but of our predecessors, that represents it. Something similar to what happens to some extreme leftist politicians who, during protest marches, discharge their aggression not by chance, but on objects-symbol of capitalism: the windows of the banks and luxury shops, the large-capacity cars, etc . That is, against on the symbols of the welfare and the money that they do not have and want to have; or of the Sicilian mafia who in the 1990s had organized attacks against symbolic monuments of the Italian State, to cause him to yield to his threats. In such cases, if the damage is not studied and programmed in order to attract the media’s reflectors on some matter of public interest, they are moved by envy (of the money of capitalists, in the case of certain leftist; of the power, in the case of Mafia; of the artistic and intellectulal wealth, in the case of Dutch) and follow an unconscious thought of the kind: “I can’t have what you have and then will don’t have it even you! ”

According to this author, who travelled and stayed in Holland many times, the aggression of Rotterdam’s Hooligans has been moved by similar factors and was specific.

The Dutch, for the geographical situation where they live, have developed over the centuries, great marine and port technical and organizational skills, first; commercial, later, and also social, more recently. Due to their geographical position, they have been able to travel to distant seas, as well as other peoples overlooking the Atlantic (see English, French, Portuguese, Spanish), more easily than others and more easily have been able to discover new lands and peoples. It was mostly people from the South of the world, less developed and organized than them, but richer in gold, diamonds, silver and objects of artistic value and, in some cases, also in the philosophy of life, towards which they developed psychologically painful envy that they satisfied, first, by exchanging the material wealth of these peoples with their own scarce ones of economic and artistic value and above all with their certainly higher technology (thus transforming themselves from skilled sailors into skilled traders); then, taking them with military violence (also transforming into skilful invaders-rulers) and, more recently, offering high-risk and / or low-salaried low-skilled jobs to those populations in Holland and tax relief for large companies (becoming definitively systematic exploiters).
So, leveraging their own initial more great technical and organizational skills, that they had to develop to survive the most adverse environmental conditions in which they lived, they have improved their survival conditions by becoming skilled colonialists and moving from a survival strategy based on marine-work to a survival strategy based on the exploitation of the work and wealth of others.
At the same time, they transformed their feelings of intellectual and moral inferiority by developing a culture characterized by attitudes of economic and social superiority towards those peoples (among them, Italy) that allows them to avoid the pain of envy and a retrospective rationalizing thought of the kind: “They are stupid and, as such, deserve to be exploited.”
That is, they have developed an idea of superiority of themselves in relation to those populations that legitimize their exploitation and depredation with little or no respect for them. Such sense of superiority is so high that sometimes it leads them to be arrogant or to think that they can easily fool those people by giving very little to have very much by them or to think that they can easily cling them by chatter or by oscene proposals always for the purpose to be able to deprive them of their material possessions. Moreover, in their country, in imitation of the nobles and the traders who have enriched themselves with the exploitation of the aforementioned and who have lived in the ages without much physical effort, they have also developed a culture that, above all, enhances the money and the property (material goods) and the desire to live by exploiting the properties and the work of others standing comfortably sitting on an armchair to command others who are working, giving as little change as possible to make the most profit. Still imitating the nobles, they have also developed doing ways “en surface” as gentlemen, similar to the English (other colonialists of excellence), who hide their true selfish and predatory attitudes. They have limited space for ideal feelings and values. Even their art is mainly based on realism: it has very little fantastic, romantic, sentimental, ideal.
If the above mentioned semi-unconscious thought is useful to them to legitimize their predatory action and to avoid guilt, the contextual feelings of superiority and arrogance have another function. The best survival strategies require, in addition to a “territory” to exploit (in this case the colonies and settlers), even psychic and physical energies, in order to be able to do it best. Well, the physical ones are derived them from the food that they eat and the psychic ones derive them from the rising mood that comes from those feelings of superiority. It is easy to guess, even by non-experts, that the feelings of legitimation free them from inhibitory brakes that would cause feelings of guilt, and the feelings of superiority rise the psychic energy and both increase the “chances” of success in the struggle for survival!
It is probable that all this is not only due to circumstantial and psychic factors but also from some stenic factors of their personality. In the adverse climatic and geographical conditions in which the ancient Dutch people lived survived the strongest individuals physically and psychologically and, therefore, the better prepared to develop these positive reactions.
In synthesis, high levels of logistic and thechnology applied to the business and the work and low levels of ethic and ideal values.

Of course, the Feyenoord fans did not come to Rome, to take over the “Barcaccia” or to destroy it, but to see their football team over there. The defeat must have caused them a common sense of frustration from the sense of inferiority that has become instinctively transformed into tension and aggression. The view of the “Barcaccia” and of many other Roman monuments must have redone a second sense of frustration from the sense of artistic and cultural inferiority that has turned into another tension and aggression that they have dispersed, not by chance, and not on windows or cars , symbols of capitalism that they themselves represent, but on a symbol of that “Italian” who wanted to defeat by football match and who for a long time held them under artistic and cultural inferiority: in fact, the “Barcaccia”.
The psychic sequence, favored by the channeling of the aggressive instincts that allows the football (which for this way contributes to the avoidance of real wars) must have been like: “shipment” in Rome, to defeat the “enemy” >>> unexpected defeat >>> frustration >>> sense of inferiority >>> consequent aggression and psychophysical tension >>> need to rebalance the psycho-physical state so altered by downloading it out >>> impossible to download directly to the “enemy” >>> association Rome football team – Rome Capital of Italy – Italy rich in monuments – monument of “Barcaccia” symbol of Italy >>> common thought: “We can not defeat them by the football and we can not have nor their property and then even them will not even have it! “>>> destructive revenge on what happened to them most easily at shooting: the” Barcaccia “.

For the ancient populations and, even today, in our unconscious defeating an enemy means killing him or making him a slave or, at least, plundering surrogatically his properties.

Of course, not all Netherlanders share such thoughts and feelings and not all those who share them and who come to Italy try to disrupt the monuments. But, on the occasion of strong tensions due to other reasons (rivalry between fans, economic interests or various emotional factors) or when some people acti in large groups or drunk, those thoughts are disinibied and the aggression associated with them is discharged!
Equally obvious that the facts of Rome were just one of the manifestations of the aforementioned ways of thinking. In fact, it is no coincidence that in response to the request for damages brought by the Italian Government, the Dutch responded by spades but, like any rule with its exceptions, Mrs. Elisabeth Jane Bertrand, ashamed of her fellow countrymen, she has pledged to raise 100,000.00 Euros more than to compensate for the damage to the “Barcaccia” and to repair the serious flaw of Dutch dignity. Too bad he could not pick them up! Successively some Dutch students have raised € 3,200.00, but then presented themselves in bulk to deliver them to Italy, hosts of Italian public institutions … earning a great collective holiday!

The Dutchs, technically and organizzatively, are certainly much more civil than the average of the people of the South of the World because they are better organized and more efficient as a State. But from the point of view of human values (affections, family, friendship, law, generosity, solidarity, altruism, etc.) they have much to learn from many of those countries. Some of them (including Italy) have been sources of civilization in the past centuries and still today base their societies on ethical principles. From these latter points of view, the current heirs of the Dutch people are still very incongruous. They also showed it to Szebrenica during the last war in the Balkans, in 1999, where Dutch soldiers acted selfishly by betraying their international mission: they became aware of what happened in their jurisdiction and, no coincidence, for that, the Netherlands was then sentenced by the International Hague Tribunal!

20. Marzo 2015 · Commenti disabilitati su Gli antichi fattori ambientali e storici della cultura greca. Una analisi etologica ed una prospettiva psicoculturale. The ancient environmental and historical factors of the Greek culture. An ethological viewpoint and a psychocultural perspective. The English traslation is after the Italian. · Categorie:Menu

Le notizie che ormai da anni giungono dalla Grecia dicono di una nazione economicamente in ginocchio ed in piena crisi sociale che non riesce a riprendersi e le immagini televisive che giungono da là raccontano la povertà ed il grave degrado della gente; specie, a chi come lo scrivente conosce quel Paese dove è stato e dal 1972 vi ha tutt’ora cari amici. Ma, in nome della verità e nell’interesse proprio dei “fratelli” Greci, questo autore vuole fare un’analisi della complessa situazione diversa dalle solite.

Da molto tempo i Greci imprecano contro i Paesi del Nord Europa; in particolare, contro la Germania, che considerano responsabili del loro disastro economico e sociale, “perché – dicono – predicano il rigore della finanza pubblica, anziché l’elasticità”!
“Dimenticano”; anzi, rimuovono dalla loro coscienza, 1) che all’epoca dell’ingresso della Grecia nella Unione Europea, tanto caldeggiato da loro stessi, i Patti prevedevano giusto il rigore economico che debbono praticare i buoni stati così come le buone famiglie; 2) che loro hanno firmato quei Patti senza essere stati costretti a farlo e, soprattutto, 3) che pur di entrare nella “rigorosa Famiglia dell’Euro” ed usufruire dei contributi finanziari che quei Patti prevedevano, loro hanno addirittura falsificato i loro bilanci statali; e 4) che, già in passato, erano andati in bancarotta: per esempi, già nel IV sec. a. C. ben 13 Città greche che avevano preso in prestito del denaro dal Tempio di Delos non lo restituirono ed alla fine dell’’800, lo Stato Greco aveva usufruito di prestiti da parte dei Paesi Occidentali, per costruire la rete ferroviaria nazionale e non li restituì. Quindi, la loro storia si ripete da secoli indipendentemente dall’UE e dalla Germania!
“Dimenticano” pure che 5) la loro più recente crisi economia risale a prima che sono entrati nella Comunità Europea, nonostante le grandi ricchezze paesaggistiche, climatiche, artistiche, archeologiche, storiche, filosofiche e letterarie del loro bellissimo Paese; che 6) ciò è colpa delle ruberie perpetrate dai loro stessi governanti ai danni del popolo; 7) che è colpa dello stesso popolo che li sosteneva e 8) che è colpa della grande corruttela e litigiosità che hanno continuato ad essere diffuse tra gli stessi Greci anche dopo l’abbattimento dei Colonnelli. Tutto ciò si ripercuote inevitabilmente a danno di tutti loro, poiché i soldi che guadagnano col turismo e con le attività marinaresche e commerciali sono rubati o male utilizzati da loro stessi! Altri Paesi, pur avendo meno ricchezze di loro, giusto come quelli del Nord Europa, sono meglio organizzati e più produttivi, impiegano meglio i soldi che guadagnano, curano meglio i loro interessi pubblici e stanno meglio di loro economicamente e socialmente!

Nel 2015 hanno minacciato il fallimento, per ottenere la ristrutturazione del loro debito; cioé, per ottenere di restituire solo una parte di quanto gli altri Stati hanno prestato loro. Di fronte al rifiuto di questi ultimi, hanno chiesto altri soldi in prestito, dopo averne avuti tanti. Sanno bene e, forse, lo avevano premeditato al tempo in cui firmarono i suddetti Patti, che, essendo ora le banche europee piene di loro Titoli di Stato, se loro fallissero, gli altri Stati e cittadini europei perderemmo i soldi che abbiamo prestato loro e, quindi, tentano di continuare ad avere soldi in prestito all’infinito. Cioè, usano la loro crisi come strumento di ricatto e di potere sugli altri Stati, nel tentativo di essere mantenuti a vita continuando a vivere come hanno fatto nei tempi recenti!

Purtroppo, per loro, gli altri Paesi hanno cominciato a capire le loro astute manovre e rifiutano di dare gli ulteriori aiuti da loro richiesti. Come ha detto Angela Merkel: “Non si può curare l’etilista in crisi di astinenza dandogli altro alcool”! Di fronte a tale rifiuto, di fronte al rischio di fallimento delle loro manovre ingannevoli e presi dal panico di affondare, qualcuno di loro, agli inizi del 2015, aveva addirittura prospettato vaghe possibili alleanze coi terroristi dell’I.S.I.S. Qualche altro, dopo 70 anni, aveva rivangato anacronistici e sopravvalutati pagamenti di danni di guerra dalla Germania coi quali avrebbero potuto tirare a campare ancora per qualche anno, “dimenticando” che proprio la Grecia precedentemente aveva negato alla Germania di avere alleggerito l’enorme peso dei debiti che aveva da pagare dopo la Seconda Guerra Mondiale. Il Ministro delle Finanze Varoufakis di allora aveva minacciosamente profetizzato pure che il sistema capitalistico europeo è destinato a fallire se l’Europa non accentua lo sviluppo economico più che il rigore. Probabilmente, lui aveva ragione sul sistema capitalistico che, fondamentalmente, mette l’accento sui consumi materiali di molti e sul profitto economico-finanziario di pochi, a danno dell’ambiente naturale e morale, e, quindi, in ultima analisi, della socialità e della collettività e rischia, prima o poi di implodere. Peccato che anche lui “dimentica” che i Greci, quando hanno chiesto di far parte della Comunità Europea, sapevano già quale era il tipo di sistema economico-finanziario nel quale chiedevano di entrare a far parte! Quindi, se hanno chiesto e deciso di entrarvi, avevano i loro calcolati motivi: quelli anzidetti! Evidentemente, il rigore non piace a molti Greci, così come ad altri Paesi del Sud Europa, perché, di fatto, fa più comodo tentare di continuare a vivere con le furberie, sfruttando il lavoro e l’efficienza degli altri; anziché, dandosi da fare, per migliorare loro stessi!

Probabilmente, certi dirigenti greci con le suddette accuse al Sistema hanno cercato astutamente di creare proprio un fronte di Paesi, pure in difficoltà socio-economiche, a causa di inefficienze simili alle loro, tutti appartenenti al Sud Europa, ivi compresa l’Italia, contro il rigore predicato dai Paesi del Nord; cioè, contro le regole e le leggi prestabilite o, comunque, a favore di regole e di leggi più flessibili tra le quali i Paesi del Sud si muovono più agevolmente nel continuare a vivere nei loro tipici modi più o meno inefficienti.

Fino ad alcuni decenni fa, indubbiamente, si viveva meglio in Grecia. Chi scrive ricorda tanti negozi aperti, la gente che amabilmente passeggiava o faceva la siesta in estate fuori delle case, ristoranti e balere pieni di turisti e di Greci… Erano i tempi in cui, nonostante la litigiosità, le ruberie e la corruzione, quello che si guadagnava in Grecia era sufficiente a far vivere la maggior parte della gente in modi dignitosi. Erano i tempi in cui non era ancora pienamente in atto la globalizzazione dell’economia e soprattutto non c’era ancora stata l’invasione commerciale cinese e quella tecnologica dei Paesi del Nord del Mondo. Questi fenomeni hanno richiesto a tutti i Paesi del Mondo di essere più competitivi; cioè, meglio organizzati dal punto di vista commerciale ed industriale, più coordinati a livello nazionale e più capaci di utilizzare al meglio le risorse economiche e culturali di ognuno. A ciò i Greci non erano preparati. Essendo da sempre vissuti in un’area geografica e climatica molto favorevole alla sopravvivenza, che non ha richiesto, fino a qualche decennio fa, appunto, di sviluppare migliori abilità tecnologiche ed imprenditoriali, è stato per loro sufficiente lo sfruttamento delle suddette loro numerosissime risorse naturali. Secondo questo autore, le vere cause esterne delle loro difficoltà sono state proprio la globalizzazione, la Cina ed il superiore livello tecnologico ed organizzativo dei Paesi del Nord del Mondo, non la Germania ed i Paesi del Nord Europa che li hanno voluti “soffocare”! Ma loro danno la colpa a questi ultimi, secondo il parere di chi scrive, come scotoma percettivo, per non guardare angosciosamente le colpe dentro loro stessi! Si tratta di uno scarico all’esterno delle responsabilità tipico della specie umana meno evoluta funzionale alla sopravvivenza: tale meccanismo consente di tenere alta l’autostima e di continuare a lottare per la sopravvivenza coi metodi che ognuno conosce, nonostante la perseverazione negli errori!

Sempre secondo chi scrive, c’è di più. Grazie alle favorevoli condizioni di sopravvivenza offerti dal clima, dalle terre e dai mari delle loro zone, da secoli i Greci non si sono dovuti dedicare ad innalzare il loro livello tecnologico, a migliorare le loro capacità d’impresa industriale e ad organizzarsi meglio socialmente come Nazione, per difendersi meglio dalle intemperie e sopravvivere. Per tale motivo, hanno sviluppato piuttosto abilità individuali o familiari o di piccolo gruppo di interesse o di fazione politica od ideologica; hanno sviluppato l’arte dialettica e la furbizia come strategia per imporsi ad altri individui o gruppi (strategia di sopravvivenza) e si sono potuti dedicare alla filosofia, alle arti, alle lettere ed alla vita amena.
Un esempio millenario della loro carenza culturale di coesione come popolo sono note le guerre fratricide tra le Città Greche che, già prima della nascita di Cristo, non riuscivano a coalizzarsi stabilmente ed a far germogliare un senso dello Stato comune: l’Antica Atene contro Corinto contro Sparta contro Tebe, etc. Un altro esempio millenario del ricorso alla furbizia ed all’inganno, piuttosto che all’organizzazione, sta nel fatto che, già nel 700 a. C., quando gruppi di Greci cominciarono a sbarcare nel Sud Italia, conquistarono molte terre non con eserciti ben organizzati e dopo grandi battaglie militari contro gli indigeni, ma con contratti truffaldini a danno di questi ultimi. Successivamente, tali gruppi, anziché organizzarsi e coalizzarsi come unica nazione, per espandersi meglio in tutta Italia od Europa, come seppero fare poi i Romani (guidati da ben altri valori morali, almeno nei primi secoli di espansione), si organizzarono in Colonie che entrarono in lotte reciproche: Syracos contro Akragas contro Katana contro Gelas contro Zante contro le altre Colonie minori. Allora come oggi Greci erano disuniti, disorganizzati ed armati l’uno contro l’altro. Allora come oggi, erano pronti a coalizzarsi solo quando individuavano un comune nemico da battere. Per esempio, tra il 490 ed il 480 a. C. circa, la Lega Peloponnesiaca composta da tante antiche rivali Città Greche ivi comprese Sparta ed Atene, con a capo Temistocle, si unirono contro i comuni nemici Persiani, a parte i continui tradimenti e lotte all’interno della stessa Lega! Anche nel 2014-2015 d. C., le antiche rivali politiche Destra e Sinistra Greche, con a capo Tsipras, si sono coalizzate contro il “comune nemico”: la Germania. Peccato che, poi, fallito l’intento truffaldino, sono tornate a scontrarsi tra di loro. Più di 20 secoli fa come oggi i Greci si sono dichiarati pronti a tradire gli ex-alleati ed a schierarsi con quello che si prospettava come un comune nemico: l’ISIS. Per esempio, nel 269 a. C. Syracos si alleò con Cartagine contro l’Antica Roma; nel 263 a. C. tradì Cartagine e si schierò con Roma durante la Prima Guerra Punica e nel 218 a. C. si schierò nuovamente con Cartagine contro Roma durante la Seconda Guerra Punica fino a che nel 212 a. C. Roma non pose definitivamente fine ai continui voltagabbana di Syracos sconfiggendola direttamente. Nel 2015 d. C. come allora, qualcuno ha minacciato oscure possibili alleanze con gli jihadisti islamici – i nemici giurati di tutto l’Occidente – contro l’Europa di cui fanno parte geograficamente ed economicamente! Le stesse tattiche militari offensive e difensive degli Antichi Greci erano basate più che sull’organizzazione e l’efficienza dei loro reparti su trucchi e trucchetti ai quali ricorrevano per sconfiggere i nemici o difendersi da loro ed idealizzavano l’eroismo individuale. In modo simile, Tsipras è apparso agli osservatori politici di 20 secoli dopo come un abile giocatore d’azzardo che cerca di fregare i soldi agli altri barando!

Loro vanno fieri di ciò oggi come allora: si vantano di riuscire (o di essere riusciti finora) a vivere bene così, senza doversi affannare troppo a studiare o lavorare! In modo simile pensano e vivono ancora oggi tanti popoli del Sud Italia, eredi culturali delle ex Colonie Greche, nonostante economicamente e socialmente sono messi pure molto male.
Da un punto di vista etologico, il sentirsi furbi è auto-esaltante, perché fa pensare di avere l’arma segreta dell’inganno utile a sconfiggere gli altri; ciò alza l’autostima e dà energie psichiche utili alla lotta per la sopravvivenza. Si tratta di una strategia utile, perché consente di ottenere ciò che si vuole col minimo sforzo. Ma solo occasionalmente, perché, quando è usata sistematicamente anche nei rapporti intra-nazionali, cioè quando i membri di uno stesso popolo cercano di fregarsi a vicenda, è come se i vogatori di una barca remassero ognuno nella direzione che fa più comodo a lui, le energie di ognuno non vengono utilizzate nella stessa direzione (interesse comune) e la barca finisce con l’affondare se si trova nel maremoto. Peccato anche che, se tale strategia viene capita a livello internazionale, chi bara viene scoperto e perde ogni chance di vincere! Insomma, non hanno sviluppato un pensiero collettivo né conseguenti interessi costruttivi comuni ed ora ne pagano le conseguenze, ma, per mantenere ugualmente alta l’autostima, attribuiscono ad altri le colpe dei loro guai!

Tale loro cultura ha risentito di quella araba tipicamente caratterizzata dal ricorso alla falsità, all’inganno ed al tradimento reciproco ed, ancor di più, contro coloro che vengono percepiti o presentati dome “infedeli” come metodi di sopravvivenza. Infatti, anche i popoli arabi sono divisi tra loro ed incapaci di organizzarsi come unica Nazione. Si pensi che per circa 400 la Grecia ha fatto parte dell’Impero Ottomano. Si è trattato di una vasta area del Nord Africa, Medio Oriente e Sud dei Balcani molto favorevole alla sopravvivenza, dove si sono sviluppate antiche civiltà le quali tutte, allora, risultarono certamente più evolute di altre più primitive di altre zone del Nord Europa e dell’Europa Orientale, ma che, proprio perché vivevano in climi favorevoli alla sopravvivenza, non sono andate molto oltre nello sviluppo sociale e tecnologico e, nei secoli, sono state superate da tali punti di vista da quelle del Nord che hanno dovuto adattarsi ed organizzarsi per sopravvivere in climi più avversi.

Tali modi di pensare e di vivere erano stati inconsapevolmente persino proiettati dai Greci già molti secoli fa nei loro racconti fantastici. Nella mitologia Ulisse era la massima espressione di tali modi di vivere e di pensare, almeno per gli uomini: egli, furbescamente, riusciva a sopravvivere contro avversità di ogni tipo ivi compresi gli dei (simbolizzazione mitologica delle autorità e delle regole). Per le donne, era la Maga Circe a simbolizzare l’ideale capacità ingannevole di indurre gli uomini al proprio volere con la magia (la seduzione erotica), più che con la probità, la cura della casa e la dedizione alla famiglia che erano simbolizzate dalla dea Estia (la meno importante e conosciuta tra i Greci; appunto, per la sua fedeltà e la dedizione alle regole ed alla famiglia che erano, invece, valorizzati nell’Antica Roma). Significativi sono pure i miti di Dioniso che, insieme ai Satiri ed alle Menadi, praticava una vita sregolata, edonistica, libera, aliena da vincoli e sacrifici come quella che vorrebbero continuare a praticare anche i Greci di oggi.
I Greci così come i loro eredi culturali del Sud Italia non si rendono conto che, le principali vittime del loro modo di pensare e di agire, sono loro stessi. Greci e Meridionali si crogiolano all’idea di essere stati in passato fonti di civiltà e, anche grazie anche a ciò, mantengono alta la loro autostima. Quello è sicuramente vero. Ma oggi i tempi sono cambiati. Generalmente, le fonti della civiltà, almeno di quella civile e non di quella umana della quale loro rimangono i principali possessori, sono altrove. Cioè, il collante sociale nei Paesi del Nord Europa è l’organizzazione civile; nei Paesi del Sud, sono i valori ed i rapporti umani (la famiglia, l’amicizia, etc.). I Paesi del Nord dovrebbero apprendere i valori della famiglia e delle relazioni umane. Quelli del Sud, anziché continuare a gratificarsi di antiche glorie, dovrebbero auto-esaminarsi (auto-analizzarsi) e prendere insegnamento da quelli oggi meglio organizzati e di più efficienti e persino dalla loro stessa mitologia. Prometeo voleva da Zeus il fuoco che egli trasportava nel suo carro (la saggezza, la conoscenza), per portarlo agli uomini sulla Terra. Zeus, saggiamente, glie lo negava, perché, altrimenti, sulla Terra ci sarebbe stato uno sconvolgimento (“I carri ed i buoi non avrebbero più lavorato”). Cioè, le persone si sarebbero demotivate e non si sarebbero più impegnate nella vita come prima. E’ qualcosa di simile a ciò che spesso accade in psicoanalisi quando un paziente prende consapevolezza delle motivazioni inconsce di alcune sue attività ipercompensative o sublimative nevrotiche ed esse svaniscono in lui con la conseguenza di non essere più motivato a praticare quelle attività. Allora, Prometeo cercò di fare bruciare il carro di Zeus, per far cader almeno una fiammella (una parte della sua saggezza e delle verità che egli teneva sul carro), impossessarsene e portarla agli uomini (quindi, ricorrendo anche lui ad un inganno contro il Padre degli Dei così come i Greci di oggi contro le regole e le leggi). Ma Zeus lo scoprì (come oggi stanno facendo i Paesi del Nord Europa con ‘attuale Grecia) e, per punire lui e tutti gli uomini, nascose quella fiammella dentro il loro cuore (proiezione mitologica della concezione dell’inconscio da parte degli antichi Greci), di modo che, continuando loro a cercare la causa dei loro mali all’esterno di sé (nel caso dei Greci, nei Paesi del Nord Europa, e nel caso delle Genti del Sud Italia, nei Settentrionali), non l’avrebbero mai trovata, poiché, in realtà, essa è dentro di loro! In cambio, sarebbero scaturiti a loro molti mali (proiezione della concezione controproducente ed autolesiva dei comportamenti irrazionali). Sono i mali che scaturiranno ai Greci ed ai loro eredi culturali del Sud Italia se non cambieranno i loro modi di pensare e di agire!

The Economic Crisis and the Greek Culture: a brief Ethological Analysis. The English translation is after the Italian.

March 20, 2015 · The economic crisis and Greek culture: a brief psycho-cultural and historical analysis. The English translation is after the Italian.

The news that for years has come from Greece say of a Nation on the knees and in a social crisis that can’t recover and the television images that come from there tell about the poor and the serious degradation of the people; especially to those who, as the writer, knows that country where he has been and from 1972 he still has dear friends. But, in the name of the truth and in the interest of the Greek “brothers”, this author wants to make an analysis of the complex situation different from the usual.

For a long time the Greeks have pledged against the countries of Northern Europe; in particular, against Germany, who are responsible for their economic and social disaster, because they say “they preach the rigor of public finance, rather than elasticity”!
“They forget”, really, they remove from their conscience, 1) that at the time of Greece’s entry into the European Union, so encouraged by them, the Pact provided for the just economic rigor that the good states should do as well as the good families; 2) that they signed those Agreements without being compelled to do so and, above all, 3) that for enter the “rigorous Family of the Euro” and for benefit of the financial contributions that those Agreements provided, they falsified their state budgets ; and 4) who had already gone bankrupt in the past: for example, already in the 4th century. b. C. 13 Greek cities that had borrowed money from the Temple of Delos did not return it and at the end of 1800, the Greek state had been using loans from some Western Countries to build the national railway network and he don’t returned it. So, their story is repeated for centuries regardless of the EU and Germany!
They also forget that 5) their most recent economic crisis dates back before they entered the European Community despite the great landscapes, climatic, artistic, archaeological, historical, philosophical and literary riches of their beautiful country; that 6) this is the fault of the rubble that their own rulers perpetrated against the people; 7) which is the fault of the same people who supported them; and 8) which is the blame for the great controversy and litigiousness that continued to spread among the Greeks themselves even after the Colonels’ System collapsed. All that is inevitably affecting all of them, since the money they earn from tourism and sea and commercial activities is stolen or misused by themselves! Other countries, though having less reachness than them just like the Northern Europe Countries, are better organized and productive, they use better the money than them and are earning, they better care about their public interests and are better off economically and socially than them!

In 2015 the Greeks threatened bankruptcy, to get their debts restructured; that is, to get only part of what the other states have lent to them. Facing the rejection of the latter, they asked for more money on loan after having had so many. They know well and perhaps they had been premeditated at the time when they signed the aforementioned Agreements, which, now being the European banks full of their State Securities, if they failed, other European states and citizens would lose their money and, therefore, they try to continue to borrow money indefinitely. That is, they use their crisis as a tool of blackmail and power over other states, in an attempt to be kept alive and continue to live as they did recently!

Unfortunately, for them, other countries have begun to understand their clever maneuvers and refuse to give the additional help that they demanded. As said Angela Merkel: “You can not treat the alcoholist in abstinence crisis by giving him more alcohol!” Faced with this refusal, in the face of the risk of failing their deceptive and panicked maneuvers, some of them, at the beginning of 2015, had even put forward vague possible alliances with the terrorists of ISIS. Some others, after 70 years, had reckoned anachronistic and over-estimated war damage payments from Germany with which they could have run for another few years, “forgetting” that Greece had previously denied Germany to have lightened the huge weight of the debts she had to pay after the Second World War. Finance Minister Varoufakis at the time had threatened to prophesy also that the European capitalist system is going to fail if Europe does not accentuate economic development more than rigor. Probably, he was right about the capitalist system that, basically, puts the emphasis on the material consumption of many and on the economic and financial profit of a few, to the detriment of the natural and moral environment, and ultimately of the sociality community and is likely sooner later it will implode. It is a shame that he also “forgets” that the Greeks, when they asked to be part of the European Community, already knew what kind of economic and financial system they were asking to join! So if they asked and decided to go in, they had their calculated reasons: the ones above! Evidently the past punishments does not appeal to many Greeks, as to other Southern European Countries, because it is more appropriate for them to try to continue to live with shivers by exploiting the work and efficiency of others instead of giving up to improve themselves!

Perhaps some Greek executives with the above-mentioned allegations to the System have tried to create a front of socio-economic difficulties due to inefficiencies similar to them, all belonging to Southern Europe, including Italy, against The Rigor Predicated by the North; that is, against predictive rules and laws, or in any case in favor of more flexible rules and laws, among which the countries of the South move more easily in continuing to live in their typical more or less inefficient ways.

Until some decades ago, undoubtedly, you lived better in Greece. The writer remembers so many open shops, people who loved to walk or make summer siesta out of the houses, restaurants and dance halls filled with tourists and Greeks. It was the times when, despite litigation, rubbish and corruption, what you gained in Greece was enough to make most people live in dignitous ways. These were the times when the globalization of the economy was not yet fully realized and, above all, the Chinese trade and the technological invasions of the North of the World were still not there. These phenomena have required all countries in the World to be more competitive; that is, better organized from the commercial and industrial viewpoint, more coordinated at the national level and more capable of making the most of the economic and cultural resources of everyone. To that the Greeks were not prepared. Having always lived in a very favorable geographical and climatic climate for survival, which did not required, until a few decades ago, to develop better technological and entrepreneurial skills, it was enough for them to exploit their very numerous natural resources . According to this author, the real external causes of their difficulties were precisely the globalization, China and the highest technological and organizational level in the countries of the North of the World, not Germany and the North European Countries that wanted to “suffocate” them! But they blame the latter, according to the opinion of this writer, as perceptive scotomas, so as not to look angrily in the sins within themselves! This is a discharge outside the responsibility of the less evolved human species functional to survival: this mechanism allows you to maintain high the self-esteem and continue to struggle for survival with the methods that everyone knows, despite persevering in mistakes!

Always according to the writer, there is more. Thanks to the favorable conditions of survival offered by the climate, the lands and the seas of their areas, for centuries the Greeks have not had to devote themselves to raising their technological level, improving their industrial enterprise skills and organizing better socially as Nation, to better defend against the weather and to survive. They instead developed individual or familial abilities or a small group of interest or political or ideological faction; they have developed dialectic art and cunning as a strategy for embodying other individuals or groups and have been devoted themselves to philosophy, arts, letters, and amenity.

A millennial example of their cultural shortage of cohesion as a people is known as the fratricidal wars among the Ancient Greek Cities which, even before the birth of Christ, could not stabilize and sprout a sense of the common state: the Ancient Athens against Corinth against Sparta against Tebe, etc. Another millenary example of the use of cunning and cunning, rather than organization, is that in the 700 b. C. when groups of Greeks began to land in southern Italy, they conquered many lands, not with well-organized armies, and after great military battles against the indigenous people, but with fraudulent contracts to the detriment of the latter. Subsequently, these groups, instead of organizing and coalescing as an only nation, to expand better throughout Italy or Europe, as the Romans did (guided by many other ideal values at least in the first centuries of expansion), were organized in colonies that entered in mutual struggles: the Ancient Syracos against Akragas against Katana against Gelas against Zante against other minor colonies. Then as today Greeks were disunited, disorganized and armed against one another. Then as today they were ready to coalesce only when they identified a common enemy to be beaten. For example, between 490 and 480 b. C. the Peloponnese League composed of many ancient rivals Greek Cities, including Sparta and Athens, with at the head Temistocles, united against the common Persian enemies, apart from the constant betrayal and struggles within the League itself! Also in 2014-2015 d. C., the old right and left Greeks, with leader Tsipras, coalitioned against the “common perceived enemy”: Germany. Too bad that, after failed the fraudulent intent, they came back to confront each other. More than 20 centuries ago, as today, the Greeks have declared themselves ready to betray the former allies and to deploy with what is being described as a common enemy: the ISIS. For example, in 269 b. C. Syracos allied with Carthage against the Ancient Rome; In 263 b. C. traded Carthage and settled with Rome during the First Punic War and in 218 b. C. Syracos re-deployed with Carthage against Rome during the Second Punic War until 212 b. C. when Roma did not permanently end the wretched Syracos defeat by defeating him directly. In 2015 a. C., as then, someone threatened with possible dark alliances with Islamic Jihadists – the sworn enemies of the whole West – against Europe of which they are geographically and economically involved! The same offensive and defensive military tactics of the Ancient Greeks were based more than on the organization and efficiency of their departments on the tricks and tricks that they used to defeat or defend themselves from their enemies and more on idealize the individual heroism than the collective. Similarly, Tsipras appeared in 2015 a. C. to political observers for 20 centuries later as a skilled player who try to frustrate the money to other players!

They are proud of it, today as then: they boast of (or have broasted until so far) to live well, without having to worry too much about studying or working! Similarly live many people in Southern Italy, cultural heirs of the Ancient Greek Colonies, despite the fact that they are economically and socially in bad conditions.

From an ethological viewpoint, feeling themselves smart and wise it’s self-exciting, because it gives the sense to have the secret weapon of deception useful to defeat others. This raises the self-esteem and gives psychic energies useful to the struggle for survival. This is a useful strategy because it allows you to get what you want with the least effort. But only occasionally, because when it is used systematically even in intra-home relations, that’s when the members of one community try to frustrate each other, it’s like the rowers of a boat who left in different direction useful to each of them, the energies of each one are not used in the common direction (interest) and the boat ends up sinking if it’s in a tsunami. It’s a pity too if that strategy is transposed internationally because who cheats is discovered and loses every chance of winning! This author means that they haven’t developed a common collective thought nor consequential constructive interests and now they are paying the consequences, but, to keep equally high their self-esteem, they give to others the faults of their troubles!

Their culture has been affected by the Arab culture typically characterized by the use of falsity, deception and mutual betrayal, so more against the people perceived or presented as “infidels”. In fact, even the Arab peoples are divided into each other and are inable to organize themselves as the only nation. About 400 years Greece has been part of the Ottoman Empire. It was a vast area of North Africa, the Middle East and the south of the Balkans, which is very favorable to survival and where ancient civilizations developed. All of them then were certainly more evolved than other primitive peoples of Northern and Western Europe. But because they lived in a climate conducive to survival, they did not go much further in social and technological development and over the centuries they have been overtaken by those peoples in the North of the World who have had to adapt and organize themselves to survive in the most adverse climates.

Such thinking and living ways had been unconsciously even projected by the Greeks many centuries ago in their fantastic stories. Ulysses in their mythology was the utmost expression of such living and thinking ways, at least for men: he, furbely, survived all kinds of adversity, including the gods (mythological symbolism of the authorities and the rules). For women, the Maga Circe symbolized the ideal deceptive ability to induce men to their own will with magic potion (erotic seduction) rather than by the probabity, the home care and the dedition to the family that were symbolized by the godness Estia (the least important and known god among the Greeks, precisely because of its fidelity and dedication to the rules and to the family who were, instead, valued in the Ancient Big Rome). Significant are instead the myths of Dionysus who, along with the Satyrs and the Menadians, practiced an unregulated, hedonistic, free life, alienated by constraints and sacrifices such as they would like to continue practicing the Greeks of today.
The Greeks as well as their cultural heirs in Southern Italy don’t realize that the main victims of their thinking and acting ways are themselves. Greeks and Southerners are basing themselves on the idea that they have been in the past sources of civilization and, thanks to this too, keep their self-esteem high. That is surely true. But today the times have changed. Generally, the sources of civilization, at least of the civil, and not of the human, of which they remain the main holders, are elsewhere. That is, the social adhesive in Northern Europe is the civil organization; In the South of the World are the human values and the human relations (family, friendship, etc.). The North Countries should learn these values. The South, instead of continuing to self-gratify about their ancient glories, should self-examine (self-analyze) and take lessons today from those better organized and more efficient of North and even from their own mythology. Prometheus wanted from Zeus the fire that he carried in his chariot (wisdom, knowledge) to bring it to men on Earth. Zeus, wisely, denied him because, otherwise, there would be a disturbance on Earth (“The wagons and oxen would no longer work!”). That’s, people on the Earth would be demotivated and would no longer engage in life as before. It’s something similar to what often happens in psychoanalysis, when a patient takes into account the unconscious motives of some of his hyper-compensative or sublimative neurotic activities and they blow away in him with the consequence of being no longer motivated to practice his previous activities. Then, Prometheus sought to burn Zeus’s chariot, to give at least a flame (part of his wisdom and truths that he held on the chariot), seizing it and bringing it to men (hence, also resorting to a deception against the Father of the Gods as well as the Greeks of today against the rules and the laws). But Zeus discovered it (as today is the Northern European countries with ‘current Greece’) and, to punish him and all men, hid that flame in their heart (mythological projection of the conception of the unconscious by the ancient Greeks), So that by continuing to look for the cause of their evils outside themselves (in the case of the Greeks, in the Countries of North Europe like the peoples of South Italy in the North), they would never have found it because, in reality, it is within them! In return, many problems would come to them (projection of the counter-productive and self-conceiving conception of irrational behavior). It is the evils that will befall the Greeks and their cultural heirs in Southern Italy if they do not change their thinking and acting ways!

16. Aprile 2014 · Commenti disabilitati su Eros and Psiche – English · Categorie:Menu

Lucius Apuleius born around 125 A.D., in Madaura, a Roman outpost in West Africa and, perhaps, died in Carthage, after 170 A.D. He wrote several works. The most famous are “The Metamorphosis” or “The Golden Ass”. One of the stories concerns an allegory, at the beginning popular: “Eros and Psyche” (the first, god of love and desire or, in Latin, Cupid and, the second, the soul or, in Latin, Psyche, the seat of intelligence and awareness).

As the dreams the popular legends are often transformations in fables of human conscious experiences or passion or unconscious trends or impulses symbolized by the players or circumstances or objects of the stories. In this Eros is envoy by his mother Venus (the goddess of beauty and sexuality or, in Greek, Aphrodite) to Psyche, envious of her beauty, so that she fell in love with the ugliest man and poor or stingy in the world (the symbolization of the not attractive person, who the people tends to reject). To that end, she entrust to him a magic potion (the symbolization of the lies and flatteries that normally are used in courtship to induce a person to be seduced), to give to Psyche and fall she in love. Eros (the representation of the sexual passion, desire and instinct) carries out his mission, because Psyche accepts the potion (that is, in fact, the courted person participates in the game of love pleasing deceptions and lies) and, with the help of Zefiro (in Greek mythology he is the strong and uncontrollable wind, son of Aeolus, god of winds, and Eos, the dawn) carries she away (the action represents the uncontainable passions) in his inaccessible palace (the alcove, the secret “garçonnière”) to mate with her in the dark (that is, without she know, reflect, argue on him).

All this represents the tendency of the courted to be seduced by the admirer without adequately reflect on his person; that’s the domain of the passions and instincts over reason.

After several couplings (that is, having satisfied the passion and the sexual instincts), driven by her sisters (the


pressures of the family and friends to learn more about the person “blindly” beloved), Psyche decides to light a


lamp, to see who is her lover (that is, to know who is really her lover and not to be guided more by passions and


instincts alone). This represents the fact that, usually, the reason regains the upper hand on the passions and


instincts after they have been satisfied.

But a drop of oil fell on Eros, burns him and he flees (when a lover is discovered emerging the weaknesses and defects of his personality or the attempts at deception or and he attempts to escape from the sensory and metaphorical sight of the seduced). This raises the ire of Venus (the theme of the classic conflict between mother-in-law and daughter-in-law) who subject Psyche to various hard vicissitudes to be overcome (the negative consequences arising from the about said conflict and from having chosen a person based on a desire, rather than on reason). She will receive aid from ants and a tower from where she meditated suicide plunging them self (the solutions found in difficult situations, in the last moments before irreparable gestures, frequently, resulting from the reinforcement that you get from them and wisdom).

Only after many vicissitudes and suffering, torn apart in body and spirit, Psyche wife Eros (often, the seduced individual who discovered the flaws or the deceptions of his attractive admirer seeks compromises with his reason to continue meeting his passions or instincts) and becomes a goddess (joined the family of her admirer, according to a Mediterranean sociocultural traditions). The gods are celebrating a feast in a party with a big banquet (the material wealth) during which some of them are playing unusual features (usually, always according to an ancient Mediterranean tradition, the love ends with a wedding and a feast at which relatives are invited and, after the marriage, in the situation of confidence and familiarity that is created, you are discovering new and unexpected aspects of the relatives personalities).




The meaning of the story could be summarized thus: usually, when your instincts are stimulated by internal or


external factors you act guided by them rather than by reason. The instincts dominate over reason. The good


advices, the knowledge and the aids are not always sufficient to impose the reason on pulses. “The heart does


not charge!” “The reasonableness do not wish you!”


Only after they are satisfied or you have found compromise between instinctual pressure and common sense


can be claimed in some way the reason. This is functional to survival of individual and species, because it’s


necessary to satisfy, before, the primary (biological) and, after, the secondary (psychological) needs.


All this has been ably represented and synthesized by the unknown author of the double statue fictile for which you can see the image above: Eros triumphant over Psyche, going left, her head and knees slightly bent. It’s the symbol of submission to the instincts of the reason and, through the representation of the physical weight bearing Psyche, gives the idea of rational charges involving the satisfaction of the instincts.


The moral of the story could be that, usually, the people are more attracted by the immediate satisfaction of the


instincts and material well-being rather than by the ideal values, why the human behaviour is driven, primarily,


by instincts and passions and, secondarily, by common sense and reason, and all this involves high costs and


long in terms of other personal and social suffering.



From the allegories of the fable you can get, perhaps, information for psychology and pedagogy. The task of the


first must be to analyze the mental activity and the behaviour (personality or phenotype), taking into account the


biological (genotype) and socio-cultural (ecotype) factors; the task of the second must be to reinforce the


rational self-control of passions and instincts.




You can get directions for psychotherapy also. It must make people aware of psychological, sociocultural and


biological factors agents on behaviour (psychological analysis). Giving advice based on common sense


(Directive Psychotherapy) or establish help-relationship (Supportive Psychotherapy) can have immediate utility,


but don’t makes you free!



The interpretations of the story, of the statue and of the possible lessons to be learned are the fruit of the personal and original analytical processing of the psychologist Dr Salvatore Cammarata.

The translation from Italian into English, unfortunately, also!

13. Aprile 2013 · Commenti disabilitati su Diabolik · Categorie:Menu

DIABOLIK: analisi biopsicosociale di un fumetto.


Diabolik e’ il personaggio a fumetti che ebbe un grande successo commerciale in Italia, soprattutto negli Anni ’60.

Si tratta di un personaggio dal corpo atletico e sexy, per le donne che possono apprezzarne le “performances” muscolari, attraverso le storie illustrate, ed immaginarne altre forme a seconda dell’immaginazione e dei desideri personali, attraverso l’aderente costume che indossa. E’ un personaggio spregiudicato nel procurarsi da vivere senza faticare col duro lavoro e fruttuosamente anche derubando od uccidendo vittime innocenti; cioe’, libero dalle inibenti remore morali e socioculturali borghesi. Esso si propone, cosi’, come icona delle aspirazioni di tanti piccolo-borghesi, proletari, sotto-proletari e di tutti coloro che, per qualche ragione, a torto o a ragione, sono o si sentono ingiustamente esclusi dal godimento di tanti beni materiali della societa’ borghese e si sentono legittimati a poterli espropriare anche con la violenza a chi li possiede … almeno in fantasia. Esso la fa sistematicamente franca con l’ ispettore Ginko, personaggio certamente con meno “appeal” per le donne, che rappresenta, invece, le regole sociali e morali da aggirare.

Diabolik e’ anche solitario ed avventuroso, tutto il contrario del piccolo, monotono ed oscuro travet di provincia per nulla interessante quelle donne che coltivano anche minime aspirazioni ad un uomo virile ed eccitante; cioe’, la maggior parte: esso e’ mascherato e misterioso, predatore ed un po’ selvaggio; cioe’, interessante ed impossibile come gli uomini che eccitano tante donne.

Il successo del fumetto si e’ verificato quando, almeno in Italia, per i residui socioculturali derivanti dalla tramontante societa’ contadina, fondata sulla valorizzazione del lavoro nei campi e della forza muscolare tipicamente maschile, i modelli ideologici e comportamentali prevedevano ancora, in gran parte, la sottomissione femminile al marito-padrone e quella giovanile al padre-padrone e prevedevano la massima aspirazione delle donne alla maternita’ ed alla famiglia.Le donne, allora, per lo piu’, per essere considerate “serie”, cioe’, “da marito”, dovevano inibire di fronte alla loro coscienza od, almeno in pubblico, i loro impulsi erotici e le loro ambizioni al potere sociale ed esibire pudicizia (v. “La questione giovanile in Italia”, in questo stesso sito). Quello era un periodo storico in cui i mass media ed il passaparola popolare cominciavano a suggerire, almeno in Italia, modelli di comportamento piu’ disinibiti ed ambiziosi per le donne, per i giovani e per i meno abbienti. Tali modelli erano, dal lato della sinistra politica, razionalizzati dalla rivoluzione culturale di origine studentesca, esplosa alla fine degli Anni ’60 in tutto il Mondo Occidentale, la quale, tra l’altro, sosteneva l’emancipazione femminile dalla subalternita’ maschile e quella giovanile dall’autorita’ paterna, e, dal lato della destra politica, si rivelavano funzionali agli interessi consumistici della emergente nuova societa’ industriale. Il successo del fumetto e’ diminuito negli successivi, quando i costumi sessuali mutarono nel senso di una parziale liberazione degli istinti biologici sessuali e dei comportamenti aggressivi che prima erano considerati socialmente e moralmente riprovevoli sia da parte maschile, segnatamente quelli violenti, che femminile, segnatamente quelli sessuali; cioe’, quando la soddisfazione istintuale avveniva, ormai, di fatto e non necessitava piu’ di soddisfazioni in fantasia o di nascosto da sguardi sociali riprovanti, e neanche aggiramenti della coscienza morale personale, mediante proiezioni di desideri piu’ o meno inconsci su immagini mediatrici come un fumetto.

Successivamente, venne affiancata a Diabolik dalle due autrici del fumetto, le sorelle Angela e Luciana Giussani, la figura di Eva Kant. Un personaggio il cui nome gia’ evoca la biblica Eva peccatrice e che venne descritto come libera, indipendente ed altrettanto spregiudicata di Diabolik, ma anche sensuale (il massimo per una donna di quei tempi … ed anche di questi!) che si e’ liberata fortuitamente e, forse, dolosamente, dal marto (cioe’, dal “giogo”maritale). Dai “reportages”giornalistici sembra che Eva replica, per certi aspetti, le personalita’ di una delle due Autrici. Ma, anche ove le due creazioni fossero solo il fruttodella intelligenza imprenditoriale delle loro Autrici, il grande successo popolare che ha avuto il fumetto dimostra che esso soddisfa, in fantasia, bisogni di soddisfazioni sessuali e di maggiore liberta’ da regole di un grandissimo numero di persone.

Per certi aspetti, Diabolik ed Eva Kant possono essere considerati una versione moderna della piu’ famosa favola di Lucio Apuleio, scritta nel 150 d. C. circa (V.Ëros e Psike”, in questo stesso sito) ed e’un modello di profitto o di altro tipo di successo basato sulla soddisfazione in fantasia di bisogni fisici o psichici frustrati di un grandissimo numero di persone (v. “Mass media e Pubblicita'”, in questo stesso sito).

Lucio Apuleio nacque attorno al 125 d. C., a Madaura, avamposto romano in Africa Occidentale, e, forse, morì a Cartagine, dopo il 170 d. C. Scrisse varie opere. Le più famose sono “Le metamorfosi” ovvero “L’Asino d’oro”. Una delle storie riguarda un’allegoria, d’origini popolari: “Eros (dio dello amore e del desiderio o Cupido, in latino) e Psyke (in latino, Psiche o anima, sede dell’intelligenza e della consapevolezza)”. Così come nei sogni le leggende popolari sono, spesso, trasformazioni favolistiche di passioni o di esperienze umane consce o di tendenze o di impulsi inconsci personificati o simbolizzati dai protagonisti o dalle situazioni delle storie narrate. In questa Eros viene inviato dalla madre Venere (dea della bellezza e della sessualità o, in greco, Afrodite) a Psyke, una bellissima giovane di cui è invidiosa, per farla innamorare dello uomo più  brutto ed avaro o povero del mondo (rappresentazione della persona non attraente e che si tende a rifiutare). A tal fine, gli affida una pozione magica (rappresentazione delle lusinghe e delle bugie che, di solito, si utilizzano nel corteggiamento, per sedurre una persona), da dare a Psyke per farla innamorare. Eros (rappresentazione della passione, del desiderio, dell’istinto) porta a buon fine la sua missione, perché Psyke accetta la pozione (cioè, la persona corteggiata partecipa al gioco amoroso piacevole degli inganni e delle bugie) e, con l’aiuto di Zefiro (nella mitologia greca è il vento forte ed incontrollabile, figlio di Eolo, dio dei venti, e di Eos, l’aurora), la trasporta (azione rappresentante l’incontenibilità delle passioni) nel suo palazzo inaccessibile (l’alcova, la “garçonnière” segreta), per accoppiarsi con lei al buio (cioè, senza che lei sappia, rifletta, ragioni). Tutto questo rappresenta la tendenza a lasciarsi sedurre della persona corteggiata alle lusinghe della corteggiatrice senza riflettere adeguatamente; cioè, il dominio degli istinti e delle passioni sulla ragione. Dopo vari accoppiamenti (cioè, dopo aver dato sfogo alla passione e agli istinti), spinta dalle sorelle (le pressioni di parenti ed amici a conoscere meglio la persona “ciecamente” amata), Psyke decide di accendere una lucerna, per vedere chi è il suo amante  (cioè, guardare, conoscere la realtà, sapere, non farsi più guidare solo dalla passione). Ciò rappresenta il fatto che, di solito, la ragione riacquista il sopravvento sulle passioni e sugli istinti dopo che questi sono stati soddisfatti. Ma una goccia d’olio cade su Eros, lo brucia e lui fugge (quando le strategie di seduzione vengono scoperte e emerge la vera personalità e i difetti o i tentativi di inganno del seduttore segue, spesso, il suo tentativo di fuggire dalla vista sensoriale e metaforica della persona sedotta, per nascondersi). Ciò suscita le ire di Venere (tema del classico conflitto tra suocera e nuora) che sottopone Psyke a varie dure prove da superare (le conseguenze negative derivanti dall’avere scelto una persona basandosi sul desiderio, anziché sulla ragione). Riceverà aiuti da formiche (la saggezza) e da una torre da dove meditava di cadere, per suicidarsi (la forza e le soluzioni che, spesso, in situazioni difficili, si trovano in se stessi negli ultimi istanti, prima di compiere gesti inconsulti). Solo dopo varie peripezie e sofferenze, lacerata nel corpo e nello spirito, Psyke sposa Eros (spesso, la persona sedotta che ha scoperto i difetti o gli inganni del suo attraente corteggiatore cerca dei compromessi con la sua ragione per continuare a soddisfare le sue passioni od istinti: si può consultare al riguardo anche Personality Disorders in questo stesso sito) e diventa dea (cioè, entra a far parte della famiglia del corteggiatore, secondo un’antica tradizione socio-culturale mediterranea). Gli dei festeggiano ad un grande banchetto (il benessere materiale) in cui alcuni di loro svolgono inusuali funzioni (di solito, sempre secondo un’antica tradizione Mediterranea,  l’innamoramento si conclude con un matrimonio e con una festa dove si mangia abbondantemente, alla quale sono invitati i parenti ed, in tale occasione, nella situazione di confidenza e di familiarità che si crea, spesso, si scoprono imprevedibili aspetti della loro personalità). ————————————— Il significato della favola potrebbe essere sintetizzato così: quando gli istinti vengono stimolati da fattori interni od esterni, di solito, si agisce guidati da essi più che dalla ragione. La consapevolezza, i buoni consigli e gli aiuti non sempre sono sufficienti ad imporre la ragione agli impulsi. “Le passioni non intendono ragioni!”. “Al cuore non si comanda!”. Solo dopo averli soddisfatti od avere trovato un compromesso tra essi e il buon senso è possibile far valere in qualche modo la ragione. Ciò è funzionale alla sopravvivenza dei singoli individui e delle specie, perché è necessario soddisfare, prima, i bisogni primari (biologici) e, poi, quelli secondari (psicologici). ————————————– Tutto questo è stato abilmente rappresentato e sintetizzato dallo ignoto autore della doppia statuina fittile di cui si può vedere l’immagine qui sopra: Eros trionfante sopra Psyke andante a sinistra con la testa e i ginocchi leggermente piegati. E ‘il simbolo di sottomissione della ragione agli istinti e, attraverso la rappresentazione del peso fisico che reca Psyke, dà l’idea degli oneri che comporta la soddisfazione del desiderio per lei. ————————————— La morale della storia potrebbe essere che, di solito, le persone sono più attratte dall’immediata soddisfazione degli istinti e dal benessere materiale, piuttosto che dai valori ideali e questo comporta elevati e lunghi costi in termini di altra sofferenza personale e sociale. ——————————————- Dalle allegorie della favola è possibile ottenere, forse, informazioni per la psicologia e la pedagogia. Il compito della prima deve essere quello di analizzare l’attività mentale ed il comportamento (personalità o fenotipo), tenendo conto anche dei fattori biologici (genotipo) e socio-culturali (ecotipo); il compito della seconda quello di rinforzare l’autocontrollo razionale delle passioni e degli istinti. ——————————————– E’ possibile trovare indicazioni anche per la giurisprudenza (per la diminuzione di capacità di intendere e volere dell’innamorato/a) e per la ricerca in campo neuro-endocrino-fisiologico. ——————————————– Ma anche per la psicoterapia. Essa deve rendere le persone consapevoli dei fattori psichici, socioculturali e biologici che determinano il comportamento (analisi psicologica). Dare consigli sulla base del senso comune (psicoterapia direttiva) e stabilire relazioni di aiuto (psicoterapia di sostegno) può avere una utilità immediata, ma non rende più liberi! ——————————————— Le interpretazioni della storia, della statua e dei possibili insegnamenti da trarre sono il frutto della personale e originale elaborazione analitica del psicologo dottor Salvatore Cammarata. La traduzione dall’italiano in inglese, purtroppo, é anche sua!