Andrew Lobaczewski - Political Ponerology - A Science on the Nature of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes

ades and last years, especially in the realms of biology, psy-

chopathology and clinical psychology. It clarifies unknown

causative links and analyzes the processes of the genesis of evil

without giving a short shrift to factors which have so far been

underrated. In initiating this new discipline, the author has also

utilized his professional experience in these areas and the re-

sults of his own recent research.

A ponerological approach facilitates an understanding of

some of mankind’s more dramatic difficulties on both levels,

the macrosocial and the individual human scale. This new dis-

cipline will make it possible to achieve first theoretical, and

then practical, solutions for problems we have been attempting

to solve by ineffective traditional means, resulting in feelings

of helplessness against the tides of history. These latter means

are based on historiographical concepts and excessively moral-

izing attitudes, which makes them overrate force as a means of

counteracting evil . Ponerology can help equalize such one-

sidedness by means of modern naturalistic thinking, supple-

menting our comprehension of the causes and genesis of evil

with the facts necessary to build a more stable foundation for

practical inhibition of the processes of ponerogenesis and coun-

teraction of their results.

Synergetic activity of several measures aimed at the same

valuable goal, e.g. such as treating a sick person, usually pro-

duces better effects than the mere sum of the factors involved.

In building a second wing for the activities of moralistic efforts

to date, ponerology will make it possible to achieve results

POLITICAL PONEROLOGY

179

which are also better than the sum of their useful effects. By

reinforcing trust in familiar moral values, it will make it possi-

ble to answer many heretofore unanswerable questions and

utilize means not used thus far, especially on a larger social

scale.

Societies have a right to defend themselves against any evil

harassing or threatening them. National governments are obli-

gated to use effective means for this purpose, and to use them

as skillfully as possible.88 In order to discharge this essential

function, nations obviously utilize the information available at

the time in that given civilization relating to the nature and

genesis of evil, as well as whatever means they can muster.

Society’s survival must be protected, but abuse of power and

sadistic degenerations come about all too easily.

We now have rational and moral doubts about prior genera-

tions’ comprehension and counteraction of evil. Simple obser-

vation of history justifies this. The general developing opinion

in free societies requires that evil repressing measures be hu-

manized and limited so as to set boundaries to possible abuse.

This seems to be due to the fact that morally sensitive individu-

als want to protect their personalities and those of their children

from the destructive influence conveyed by the awareness that

severe punishment, especially capital punishment, is still being

meted out.

And so it is that the methods of counteracting evil are being

mitigated in their severity, but at the same time effective meth-

ods to protect the citizenry against the birth of evil and force

are not indicated. This creates an ever-widening gap between

the need for counteraction and the means at our disposal; as a

result, many kinds of evil can develop at every social scale.

Under such circumstances, it may be understandable that some

voices clamor for a return to the old-fashioned, iron-fisted

methods so inimical to the development of human thought.

Ponerology studies the nature of evil and the complex proc-

esses of its genesis, thereby opening new ways for counteract-

ing it. It points out that evil has certain weaknesses in its struc-

ture and genesis which can be exploited to inhibit its develop-

88 Unless, of course, the government itself is the evil that threatens and har-

asses the people. [Editor’s note.]

180

PONEROLOGY

ment as well as to quickly eliminate the fruits of such devel-

opment. If the ponerogenic activity of pathological factors -

deviant individuals and their activities - is subjected to con-

scious controls of a scientific, individual, and societal nature,

we can counteract evil as effectively as by means of persistent

calls to respect moral values. The ancient method and this

completely new one can thus combine to produce results more

favorable than an arithmetic sum of the two. Ponerology also

leads to the possibilities of prophylactic behavior at the levels

of individual, societal, and macrosocial evil. This new ap-

proach ought to enable societies to feel safe again, both at the

internal level and on the scale of international threats.

Methods of counteracting evil which are conditioned upon

causation, supported by ever-increasing scientific progress, will

of course be much more complex, just as the nature and genesis

of evil are complex. Any allegedly fair relationship between a

person’s crime and the punishment meted out is a survival of

archaic thinking, something ever more difficult to comprehend.

That is why our times demand that we further develop the dis-

cipline initiated herein and undertake detailed research, espe-

cially as regards the nature of many pathological factors which

take part in ponerogenesis. An appropriately ponerological

reading of history is an essential condition for understanding

macrosocial ponerogenic phenomena whose duration exceeds

the observation possibilities of a single person. The author

utilized this method in the following chapter, reconstructing the

phase wherein characteropathic factors dominated in the initial

period of the creation of pathocracy.

In teaching us about the causes and genesis of evil, ponerol-

ogy barely addresses human guilt. Thus, it does not solve the

perennial problem of human responsibility, although it does

shed additional light from the side of causation. We become

aware of just how little we understand in this area, and how

much remains to be researched, while attempting to correct our

comprehension of the complex causation of phenomena and

acknowledging greater individual dependence upon the opera-

tion of outside factors. At that point, any moral judgment about

another person or his blame-worthiness may strike us as based

mostly upon emotional responses and centuries-old tradition.

POLITICAL PONEROLOGY

181

We have the right and duty to critically judge our own be-

havior and the moral value of our motivations. This is condi-

tioned by our conscience, a phenomenon as ubiquitous as it is

incomprehensible within the boundaries of naturalistic think-

ing. Even if armed with all the present and future accomplish-

ments of ponerology, will we ever be in a position to abstract

and evaluate the individual blame of another person? In terms

of theory, this appears ever more doubtful; in terms of practice,

ever more unnecessary.

If we consistently abstain from moral judgments of other

people, we transfer our attention to tracking the causative proc-

esses that are responsible for conditioning the behavior of an-

other person or society. This improves our prospects for proper

mental hygiene and our capacity to apprehend psychological