On Dehumanization1

These notes provide a framework for thinking about the relationship between inner and outer events associated with dehumanization. They are not in any sense a complete analysis of the social and intrapsychic determinants of the activity. Throughout, I shall keep in mind Einstein and Freud's discussion in their “Why War?” correspondence (Freud, 1932–1933) on behalf of the League of Nations, where Einstein wrote to Freud:

How is it possible for this small clique to bend the will of the majority, who stand to lose and suffer by a state of war, to the service of their ambitions? … An obvious answer to this question would seem to be that the minority, the ruling class at present, has the schools and press, usually the Church as well, under its thumb. This enables it to organize and sway the emotions of the masses, and makes its tool of them. Yet even this answer does not provide a complete solution. Another question arises from it: How is it these devices succeed so well in rousing men to such wild enthusiasm, even to sacrifice their lives? Only one answer is possible. Because man has within him a lust for hatred and destruction. In normal times this passion exists in a latent state, it emerges only in unusual circumstances; but it is a comparatively easy task to call it into play and raise it to the power of a collective psychosis. Here lies, perhaps, the crux of all the complex factors we are considering, an enigma that only the expert in the lore of human instincts can resolve. (pp. 200–201)

Note the inclusion of enthusiasm and lust in Einstein's comments. Lust, in particular, is a word that did not make it into the psychoanalytic lexicon in discussions of annihilation anxiety, the death instinct, and sadism in relation to hatred and destruction. I want to suggest that it may help us in our understanding of how and why human beings dehumanize themselves and others.