When the question is about defining the phenomenon
of aggression, people most often appeal to emotional, psychological and
sentimental spheres, failing to take into consideration, as it is common
in the modern world, the most profound, metaphysical aspects of the phenomenon.
In the channel of the humanistic tradition there appeared by itself the
negative attitude to aggression, which is considered as something subject
to full extermination or (what is more realistic) to diminishing. However,
aggression is so closely related with the human nature, that reminds about
itself constantly - both in everyday life, in private life psychology and
in political reality of wars, conflicts, clashes. Let us try to comprehend
the aggression, abstracting ourselves from all usual stereotype views -
pacifist, scandalously apologetic, psychoanalytic or socially deterministic
Aggression as a phenomenon could be fullier defined as "violent overstepping
bounds". Just in this its essential quality consists, this quality
is recognized in conflicts of everyday life, in a criminal occurrence,
in a large-scale military clash. A criminal violently transgresses the
bounds of the social ethics, moral, physic or economic integrity of a human
or a community. This is aggression. An army violently oversteps frontiers
of a hostile country or enemy's defensive lines. It is aggression too.
Finally, ideologists, breaking the settled stereotype ways of thinking,
violently overstep the bounds of mental cliches. And this is aggression
Not only social or exclusively human existence is filled with the various
types of bounds, transgressing which gives birth to various types of aggression.
The structure of all reality is built just on various bounds, separating
every thing and every mode of existence from all the rest ones. In some
sense, the bound itself makes of every thing what the latter is by itself,
being the embodiment of the difference, differentiation from the rest objects.
In the most general sense, the aggression can have also a cosmic, universal
dimension, showing through the violent interference of one into another.
There is abundant example of aggression in the animal and vegetable kingdoms,
in which the existence of a species or an individual is often sustained
by doing violence to others, that makes the continuous round of transformations,
assimilation and adaptations of Universe's environment and of beings, inhabiting
Consequently, the aggression is something general, universal, and integral
to the basis of the reality itself.
The violent overcoming of the bound has two
aspects: one is relatively negative, the other is relatively positive.
The subject of aggression, that is the being, which makes an aggressive
assault upon another one (upon the object of aggression), seeks to extend
its own limits by such action, to strengthen, to improve, replenish its
own nature. Taking victim's life, a beast of prey appeases its hunger,
sustains its own existence, obtaining matters, necessary for the organism.
The military aggression expands territories and multiplies the wealth of
the victorious party, and even a boozy fight victor strengthens his self-confidence,
faith in himself and gets moral satisfaction. In short, in the aggression
the positive expansion of the subject, expanding its sphere of potentialities,
But the object, undergone the aggression, the eaten or beaten victim, the
subjugated nation etc., on the contrary, as a result of bounds' infringement
(mutual in the given process), just loses what it had before, reduces its
sphere of potentialities. It (the object) becomes a pay for other's success,
a scapegoat. In some sense, the fact itself of aggression turns it, in
fact, in the object, whereas previously, before the assault, it could possess
the illusion of its own subjective character, bringing about the aggression
toward other beings, objects, nations. This is the negative aspect of the
"violent overcoming bounds".
In the pre-humanistic civilization and in non-humanistic (traditional)
civilizations, which exist even till now, both aspects of the aggression
were considered in the aggregate, as two mutually complementary elements,
laid in the primordial structure of the Universe. The Chinese symbol "Yeng-and-Yang"
is a perfect example of that fatalistic dualism. The white fragment of
the circle presents the subject here; the black one presents the object
In the symbolism of sexes, the first one is identified with the masculine
principle (Yang), the second one is identified with the feminine one (Yeng).
Hence follows the common "legitimization" of the aggression,
that was peculiar to the traditional world, in which it would not come
to anyone's mind to artificially oppose the human to basic forces of the
reality. Certainly, the more refined civilizations shaded by all means
the laws of aggression on the social level, so the difference from the
barbarian customs was on hand. However, in all cases the right on the "violent
overstepping bounds" was preserved, even if the latter was taking
a sublimated form, both in the cases of wars and in the cases of individual
repression, bringing about which was the function of some special traditional
organizations - the proto-type of the present-day police. The exploits
of conquerors, subjugators, destroyers were sung in legends and eposes,
which are one and all built on the formula "Vae victis!" ("Woe
to the vanquished").
of aggression in Tradition
What is the metaphysical justification of aggression
in traditional civilizations, besides the direct observation of the nature's
The matter is that tradition considered the fact itself of bounds' existence
as the expression the Universe's incompleteness in relation to the latter's
Cause, conceived as something Absolute, One and being beyond all limits.
Consequently, the aspiration for the expansion of one's existence, for
the existential expansion, for the "transgressing bounds" (in
Latin it is transcendere, "transcending") was considered as a
profound impulse of movement to the divine, as the echo of missing the
Absolute, implanted in the world and in the beings of the world.
Certainly, metaphysical and ascetic practices in such case could be called
the pure form of aggression. In those practices the initiated ones strove
for transgressing all bounds, the maximum bringing their own "ego"
to the absolute state, putting to the aggression not just some objects,
but all the reality as a whole. In the way of the direct self-deification
the maximum of the aggressive impulse is concentrated, for the Divine is
just the cancel of bounds and limits, constituting the essence of the non-divine,
immanent. By the way, hence follows the Jewish word "Satan",
literally meaning "barrier", "obstacle", that is "bound",
comprehended as something negative. Departing from this, it is simple to
take the next step and explain the mechanism of so called "demonization
of an adversary", examples of which is so abundant in the traditional
legends, epos, religious teachings. What serves as an obstacle on the way
of expansion of a nation, country, religion, more narrow people's community
and, finally, a human; what limits the will of the latter to the totalization,
to the expansion of existence, all this automatically falls under the sign
of "Satan", obtains the quality of the theological evil, and
consequently, the aggression becomes legitimized on the most elevated levels.
Due to such "demonization of an adversary" or a victim their
objectivization occurs, depriving them of their subjective quality, abstracting
from the specific, social or religious solidarity.
Iran against Turan, Acheians against Trojans, Israelites against gois,
Moslems against giaours, Aces against Vans, Gods against Titans, and sometimes
even women (Amazons) against men - the various paradigms of dualism, borne
by the primordial impulse to aggression, are abundant in the most ancient
chronicles, religious codices, poetic legends and so forth. By the justification
of their own camp the people of Tradition justified, in fact, something
which is more - the principle itself of aggression, the primordial will
itself to the "violent transgressing bounds", the aspiration
for the totalization of one's own subjective character (however that may
be expressed - either through national or religious, or tribal affiliation).
In the modern world the break has occurred
with the centuries-old traditions, that fully turned over the mental and
social structures of the modern humankind in comparison with the long milleniums
of the past. "Enlightenment", humanism, rationalism and other
"progressist" tendencies put forward the system of estimations
and values, fully contradicting the basic orientations of the traditional
society. This certainly (and maybe in the most expressive way) touched
upon the principle of aggression.
The European Age of Enlightenment implanted in people a one-sided view
of the aggression, a view from the victim's point exclusively.
The light side of that phenomenon, based on the will to the Absolute, to
attaining the total character, to the maximum extension of a subject up
to the sphere of the Divine, discontinued being understandable, concrete
and ontologically rooted, and, consequently, was identified with the "survival",
with atavism, with inertial barbarism, with the temporal and in the main
rectifiable defect of the civilization. Having lost its metaphysical legitimacy,
the aggression became to be perceived as unlawful transgressing the integrity
of what was proclaimed the supreme value in itself - a human individual,
society, being etc. Hence follows all "natural right" tendency,
which has been developed starting from the times of Rousseau. For the existential
expansion discontinued being metaphysically justified, the victim put in
its own claims to the "total security", that is to the artificial
and raised to the highest ethical imperative defense from aggression. The
aggression was in fact outlawed. With this, in particular, the general
"democratic" legal statue, which prohibits the propaganda of
war, is connected.
It turned to be possible to change the cultural and social foundations
of the society, whereas it was naturally beyond anyone's powers to change
the basic tendencies of both cosmos and human beings. Therefore the aggression
never disappeared either from history, or from the everyday life, or from
the wild nature. It just began to be perceived as the evil, as one limited
being's claim on utilizing another one, which arises spontaneously from
time to time.
For the process of subject's totalization was excluded, the aggression
became to be considered as merely quantitative acquiring, piling external
subjects, as the trivial and vulgar selfishness, as the fatal "life
struggle". Therefore all of the aggression became to gradually be
reduced to merely economic sphere and all its manifestations in other spheres
were strictly blamed by "public opinion". "Total security"
and "human rights" were from then on guaranteed by transference
of the aggression into the sphere of the abstract material standards -
genesis of terrorism
As the Western way of thinking became more
and more popular, as the capitalist, liberal system attained its global
character, the systematic discredit of both aggression and its manifestations
was going on. This touched political, cultural, ideological spheres. The
civilization, fully based on defending victim's interests exclusively,
aspired to gradually clear itself from those institutions, structures and
models of behaviour, which as integral parts were preserved in the human
community since its traditional "pre-humanistic" state. With
this trend the pacifism, women suffrage, tendencies towards weakening State
machinery, the ideology of "human rights" and so forth blend
- all what makes up the ideological facade of the present-day liberalism,
which became a social and political model, dominating on the planet.
At the very last stage that process brought to the fact, that practically
all forms of aggression - everyday life, political, aesthetic one and so
forth - were "outlawed", and bounds became to be considered as
something inviolable and sacred. Together with that the other phenomenon
emerged - the tendency to the "inviolable overcoming bounds",
to the mondialization of the world, to the "soft" mixing all
subjects, people and beings in some common crucible, in One World. After
stating bounds` inviolability the bounds` cancel was stated, but this time
the question was not about expansion and totalization of the subject, of
the aggressor, but about rallying victims in the common merely objective
character cosmos. The perfect form of such an ideology is the model, known
as "soft ideology", in which the matter is about mixing with
each other most various ingredients in the case they are all deprived of
a brightly expressed aggressive principle, of the subjective character.
In the historical aspect, just at the same time, when the first signs of
the soft ideology appeared (that is at the end of 60-ies/at the beginning
of 70-ies of our century), the adjacent phenomenon emerged: the modern
terrorism. Certainly, the terrorism did exist before also, but till some
certain moment it remained rather lumpen phenomenon, in which the most
intensive manifestations of political aggression were concentrated, confronting
with the unshakeable wall of System. The modern terrorism, however, is
quite different from the radical political trend of revolutionaries of
the nineteenth/the beginning of twentieth century, for it tends to converting
from being extreme political and rather pragmatical means to a kind of
an independent phenomenon, self-sufficient one and representing a special
kind of the ideology. The representatives of the civilization, based on
the soft ideology, gradually extended the notion "terrorism",
having included all those manifestations, which contrasted with the basic
foundations of their own doctrine, in it. In other words, the terrorism
became a synonym for aggression in the latter's most general metaphysical
sense. All the components of present reality, which did not confine themselves
to norms, imposed by "world community of victims", were gradually
brought to the terrorism pole. Political parties, which were alternative
to the liberal system, religious trends, even entire nations went over
to the sector of "terrorism", being driven there by the expanding
The terrorism became gradually the last asylum of the subject, craving
for the totalization in the world, where that craving is outlawed. It is
then not surprising, that the independent doctrine of aggression became
to gradually turn out, the doctrine of the pure terror beyond the more
narrow interests of a party, nation or religion.
The first way
The pure terror phenomenon is the last word
in the history of aggression and the liberal struggle against it. The time
of "terrorism in the name of narrow interests of a party" is
up. More and more people realize the pragmatical character of a concrete
party membership in the case of their personal existential choice. Besides,
the classical ideolodies' defenselessness in the face of all-absorbing
and all-dissolving mondialist soft ideology becomes more and more apparent.
The sharp rise of May 1968 brought to the sad and insipid reduced reformism,
to the social-democratic parody. Palestine intifada resulted in the compromise
collusion of Arafat with Tel-Aviv. As a result of the Soviet system breakdown
the decaying remains of the guerilla are forsaken in the Latin America.
The rightist terrorism was managed even before. The doctrinal, ideological
defeat of all "open society enemies" is on hand.
But in spite of all substitutes, proposed by the soft ideology adherents
(eccentric and purely visual aggression in the youth fashion; endless TV
hits with blood and corpses; removal of a ban on the "sado-maso"
production etc.), the special type of people is preserved, from who the
aggression is inseparable, who experience the incessant, poignant craving
for the "totalization of the subject", exceeding the bounds up
to the sphere of the transcendent. It is just them who begin to lay foundations
of a new ideology, a universal ideology beyond the obsolete and outdated
In 1994 in Italy the book of Enrico Galmozzi was published with the name
"Subject without confines" - "Il soggetto senza limite".
Its author is one of the founders of the extremely leftist terrorist organization
"First way", Prima Linea, which competed with the famous "Red
Brigades". It is extremely significant, that the book of the leftist
extremist, anarcho-communist Galmozzi is dedicated to d'Annunzio, the founder
of the fascist party in Italy, the adherent of the aristocracy and, finally,
the man, who was as a rule ascribed to the extremely rightist political
wing. Enrico Galmozzi brilliantly analyses the d'Annunzio's phenomenon
from the existential point of view and draws very interesting parallels
between him and anarchism figures and even between him and Lenin. What
is most important, the matter here is not in interpreting d'Annunzio from
the leftist point of view, but in the search of one universal criterion,
which could unite people of one and the same metaphysical type beyond the
ideological differences. The formula, which was found by Galmozzi for the
name of his book, seems so felicitous that it could serve as a common,
universal slogan for all opponents to the "soft concentration camp"
of the modern mondialism.
"Subject without confines" is the purest possible realization
of the metaphysical sense of aggression, it is surprisingly precise slogan,
expressing the inner nature of the Pure Terror.
From now on everything will only depend on the ability of "solitary
people" to take leave of the previous ideological illusions, having
recognized the metaphysical necessity and inevitability of a new systematization
of a social sphere - not according to the scale "the rightist against
the leftist", but according to the scale "friends of aggression"
against "enemies of aggression".
And who knows, whether the mondialist integration of people, who are objects,
people, who are victims, into the one planetary liberal community, into
One Absolute Object provokes the emergence of a new and last character
of the world history - the Absolute Subject, Subject without confines,
which will commit the conclusive act of the eschatological drama.