"Blunt Not the Heart, Enrage It": The Psychology of Revenge and Deterrence (November 2017)
dc.creator | McDermott, Rose | |
dc.creator | Lopez, Anthony C. | |
dc.creator | Hatemi, Peter K. | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2018-03-22T18:41:19Z | |
dc.date.available | 2018-03-22T18:41:19Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2017-11 | |
dc.description | Why is the instinct for vengeance so strong even when it is clear that widespread death and destruction would be a much more likely outcome than any kind of “victory”? In the event of a nuclear war, why is second-strike retaliation so certain when it may gain nothing of social or material value? We believe these things because humans share a universal thirst for retaliation in the face of threat and in the wake of loss, no matter what classical economists may say to the contrary about how people “should” behave. Indeed, the psychology of revenge and the hatred on which it rests make a seemingly irrational second strike entirely credible. We can apply this analysis to nuclear weapons, but the basic drive is no different than the one that makes most people want to kill anyone who threatens their child, or to hurt a cheating spouse. The instinct for revenge is universal, automatic, and immediate. It also serves a function: to deter the threat of future exploitation. | en_US |
dc.description.department | LBJ School of Public Affairs | en_US |
dc.identifier | doi:10.15781/T2RR1Q41T | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/2152/63934 | |
dc.language.iso | eng | en_US |
dc.publisher | Texas National Security Review | en_US |
dc.relation.ispartof | Texas National Security Review | en_US |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | Texas National Security Review;Vol 1, No 1 | |
dc.rights.restriction | Open | en_US |
dc.subject | Revenge | en_US |
dc.subject | deterrence | en_US |
dc.subject | psychology | en_US |
dc.subject | TNSR Vol. 1, Iss. 1 | en_US |
dc.title | "Blunt Not the Heart, Enrage It": The Psychology of Revenge and Deterrence (November 2017) | en_US |
dc.type | Journal | en_US |