Warrior fanatics

[admin]

I was reading this and found it interesting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Swords_Society

Apparently a lot of the 'boxers' during the Boxer Rebellion, so called because of their kung fu activities, were sort of fanatics, in that they believed they could make themselves immune from harm by doing certain kinds of exercise, praying, chanting and using amulets and charms. I know that similar things are still currently done by martial artists in places like the Philipines.
This got me thinking about legends around Norse beserkers and suchlike. I wonder what factors lead to having a group of extremist fanatical warriors in a society. An easy answer might be to say that such things arise amongst the oppressed and in communities under external stress or threat. But this doesn't always seem to be the case - as far as I can tell the Norse were aggressors rather than victims of external stresses and the Sikhs in the 18thC were expanding outwards and also had their own kinds of extremist fanatical warriors. In contrast there are lots of example of oppressed communities than did not fight back and did not see the rise of an extremist warrior cult.
I wonder then, why do these groups appear and why do they not appear? Thoughts?

[TribalPunk]

Just a stab in the dark, but I would wager that they do not appear in cultures that have a greater grasp of the human body and medical sciences. More advance knowledge would seem to preclude the rise of Warrior Fanatics that rely on "other worldly" means to protect themselves as such knowledge would provide the warriors with a very real idea of how the body works and what harm can be caused to it.

It seems that as we advance in forward in time we see less Fanatic Warriors. As to why they appear I think it is human nature that some will always stray to the extremes of any belief system, be it religion, martial philosophies or national pride.
The perfect storm, so to speak, for the rise of Warrior Fanatics would be a culture that has minor knowledge or modern medicine and human anatomy as well as a strong belief in some external structure (religion or country as examples).

[bigdummy]

We had a discussion of this a while back. Moro, Greek Maenads, the Malay "amok" and many others seem to have some links

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10833&start=0&hilit=berzerker

[admin]

I think it is a very good point regarding the belief structures in place. I think it's correct that to have such fanatics they either have to believe that their practices make them somehow superhuman, or that by their acts they (or their loved ones, or perhaps their own memory/fame) will somehow be rewarded.
I think in more media-sensitive societies (like ours) there is a third motivation, which is to be 'that hero guy' that we've been told about since childhood - such as getting into the special forces. Which I suppose on a fundamental level is similar to the motivation of gaining a legend or memory of yourself. Not necessarily equating religious fanatics with special forces, but I do think that it is different societies' way of creating a soldier elite in their different ways.

[Magnus Hagelberg]

would it be a symptom for elite forces then to think that they are untouchable?

I'm drawing the parallel to the internet, and what could be called 1337 kids. The hacker community where people who feel that they are good, do intrusions and get into hard to reach places in order to challenge themselves, and from time to time brag about what they have done -and are surprised when they get caught due to this bragging.

Could it be a human trait of exploration that is connected to our development?

train of tought: assuming that the elite warrior who thinks he is immortal, has less of a flinch response and therefore less of a reaction time. Thus it might be true that he has a higher chance of success in eliminating the enemy simply by moving first.

And just because he so often is successful he will keep on feeling immortal. A spiral that could get out of hand ofc.

[bigdummy]

I think there is an element of strong, nearly unbearable social pressure. I definitely think the Norse were under that, or at least some of them were, despite not being invaded. True of the women who became Maenads in Greece and Rome, and in Malaysia. Some elements of mysticism, the drug thing, and an intense social pressure or discipline seem to be common factors. And funny mushrooms of course.

It's interesting also how associations with certain animals seem to be common. There are some interesting data about wolf cult associations in Estonia.

Cu Cuhlian seems to be very much like a berzerker in his warp-change, including facial distortiions, exhaustion / stupor afterword and so on.

BD

[Lyceum]

I think you need to differentiate "beserker/madness" from "typically culturally vested associations with heroism". I.e contextualise your boundaries for what counts as batshit crazy. Let's not do a Lincoln here.

[Ulrich von L...n]

IMO non-military amok is mainly a psychological disorder or a desperate attempt to break out from an unbearable life situation in a culture which does not approve suicide.

Basically we could put these fanatics in two big categories. Some examples.

(Mainly) suicidal warrior fanatics:
- assassins
- Chinese boxers
- berserks
- kamikazes
- military amok (Moro juramentado)
- modern day jihadists

(Mainly) non-suicidal warrior fanatics:
- Waffen SS
- Ottoman janissary

Among the conditions that facilitate the appearance of suicidal fanatics are: a highly manipulative and unscrupulous elite (even by the standards of usually manipulative and unscrupulous elite), a culture that provides easy methods to brainwash these guys, the necessity to use unconventional and asymmetric military tactics, just to name a few.

[bigdummy]

There are also in-between cases like the Maneads... sort of like the Malay Amok but with a purpose, to undermine certain secular authorities on behalf of a cult.

BD

[Ulrich von L...n]

For me Greco-Roman Maenads are just members of a violent cult, probably even fanatics, probably disruptive, with violent rituals, sometimes resulting in deaths, but definitely not warriors. It would be interesting to see some evidence about their training, specific weapons, tactical application during military actions etc.

Another thing.

TribalPunk has suggested that "more advance knowledge would seem to preclude the rise of Warrior Fanatics". Unfortunately this is only partially true, it is enough to examine the rise of well educated modern day jihadist, quite a deadly mix = modern communication technology, weaponry and deeply medieval thinking.

[janner]

... deeply medieval thinking.

That'll be that 'renaissance' propaganda kicking in again - after all, people in the middle ages were clearly over emotional numbties, blinded by religion and incapable of rational thought...

In my experience, most 18 - 20 year old modern British infantrymen also think that they are indestructible. I spent a while training 16 - 18 year old junior soldiers in the early noughties and it would not have been so difficult to turn a selected minority into fanatics.

Drills highlighting the benefits of team work, hard cover and suppressive fire, as well as CIED techniques prove more effective than a fanatical mindset of course

[Ulrich von L...n]

First of all I don't equate the Middle Ages with some kind of a period of intellectual darkness that supposedly occurred in Europe following the collapse of the Western Roman Empire, or "Dark Ages".

For me "deeply medieval thinking" simply means that a person's thinking heavily involves around his God and his religion. In our context this religious thinking is also seriously twisted by the elite and certain scholars within that particular religion in order to facilitate unlimited violence toward followers of other religions.

So it would be better to say: deeply religious and twisted thinking.

You are absolutely right that the age between 16-20 is probably the best to turn susceptible young guys into warrior fanatics.

[Stevie T]

I wondering if there might be a correlation between how close the links are between military/civilian/clerical populations.

In pre-industrial revolution Euorpe all three were much closer and interacted a lot more. Clerics, outside of military control, could indoctrinate and success would create "Legend" among the civilian population. Since then Europes "warriors" have lead much more separate lives and the military control clerical involvement within their structure. Acts of great heroism rarely make it into modern media.

The Euorpean fanatics we get now that go "crazy batshit" come from our civilian populations and create Legands, widely covered in our media.

Yet, when we look to the modern fanatics, they generally come from populations where military/civillian/clerical are much more closely linked, often areas of civil war like parts of the Middle Fast, Africa or the Asian Sub-continent.

While they may not beleive that they are immortal, I wonder if it is in part the belief that they will become immortal through Legend within their population combined with promises on reward in the after life.

[bigdummy]

I think religious fanatacism in general, was far worse in the 16th and 17th Centuries, than in the late Middle Ages.

Witch-burnings, the worst of the inquisition and so forth were all later on.

BD

[Stevie T]

I think religious fanatacism in general, was far worse in the 16th and 17th Centuries, than in the late Middle Ages.

Witch-burnings, the worst of the inquisition and so forth were all later on.

BD

Might that be due to the simple fact that there was suddenly a choice of relgion/sub-religions?

[bigdummy]

There were other choices in the 15th too, but there is no doubt the reformation escslated tensipns through the roof

[janner]

I think religious fanatacism in general, was far worse in the 16th and 17th Centuries, than in the late Middle Ages.

Witch-burnings, the worst of the inquisition and so forth were all later on.

BD

Might that be due to the simple fact that there was suddenly a choice of relgion/sub-religions?

You mean like the reform movement of the eleventh century...

[Magnus Hagelberg]

I should think that all people who experience life crisis of some kind, are more susceptical to convertion to fanatical purpose.
Loosing close members of ones family.
loosing previous purpose in life.

Becoming unemployed, changing setting such as moving country etc. are all things that makes us reevaluate much of our base values. As soon as we start doing this, we become more susceptical to new ideas.
As human being, we are adaptable - so it could be argued that it's a survival trait that glitches.. or would it be functioning too good? that it's for the greater good of the group to be a suicidal?

[Fab]

I think - as others have said - that the part of "belief" is important in all this, in addition to the rest.

The "warrior trance" or other alterations of consciousness (such as induced by repeated, simple rythms, chants and the like) is a known fact. Add on top of that a bit of "it works" (providied by a belief system that includes such mental states as part of the 'real world') and you have it (and the occasional drug or chemical can also help).

Africa is a good example of this. It is still a land filled with mystical beliefs - that actually *work*, in a certain sense.
A mate of mine was part of the French "Licorne" operation in Ivory Coast - basically a buffer between the rebelious North and the contra-rebelious South (all political and financial interests of former Colonial powers aside). Rioters would go and see the local Marabout (not necessarily muslim BTW) and pay him for 'protection' - he'd give them herbs and chant a bit and that would make them immune to bullets.

Now, my mate would tell me : try to control an angry mob which firmly believes you can't harm them. Even firing .50 cal over their heads or at their feet simply doesn't work - because they 'know' they're immune.
And what of the occasional collateral damage ? Well, he simply dodn't believe enough, or the Marabut wasn't good enough (and would probably be lynched afterwards).

Also in Africa, you can have your penis stolen by someone barely touching you in the street - which is the cause of a lot of violent deatsh ther. That's OT, but it shows the importance and weight of belief in these cultures.


Now, there is fanaticism and fanaticism. A red, blood-hot one and a cold, intellectual one. Africans, Berserks, Amok and the like would be part of the firs, while terror plotters, SS, and the like would be part of the other. There are common factors between the two, and they are not mutually exclusive. But they're different. The first would rely more on 'natural' reactions of the Human Animal (spread on a background of cultural beliefs), while the latter would simply be born of cold Belief and indoctrination - more "intellectual", in a way.

[Magnus Hagelberg]

ah, so this intellectual one is where you can link in the apeasement of poppulations.
Zombification if you like.
Being part of a Mob, and mob mentality also seems to produce a belief that you cannot be touched. We are so tough that nothing can stopp us. It's not nearly as battshitt crazy as the berzerks (from what I've withnessed) but then again, there should be other examples from sittuations where people got cornered.

This mental trigger of self worth and invurnerability is rather scary/usefull as it seems.