International Journal on Criminology Volume 4, Number 2, Winter 2016 | Page 36

International Journal on Criminology
imagination the single object idealized in an ambivalent way, these two sorts of drives
are dissociated and directed toward two different objects, each with characteristics
similar to the first idealized person who combined these heterogeneous traits.
Carrying the idea of authority itself, the symbolic representative of the father
(or other idealized subject), the government and its representatives form the split
part of the initial image of the father through the effect of the psychological work
of incrimination and culpabilization. At the same time, the preferred part attaches to
the idea of a new justice established by the sponsors, who use suggestion to occupy
the place of the ideal self, a symbolic position reinforced by adapted discourses.
Poor education, latent mental conflicts: some individuals give themselves blindly
to uneducated preachers who claim to teach faith and hold the truth—despite being
subject to hallucinations and neuroses themselves. Even if the psychology of some of
the “doctors of the faith” is pathological, yet their influence remains decisive.
Submission to leaders comes uniquely from a morbid identification with the
moral consciousness inherent in the mind of a child. To this end, the image of these
“doctors” inhabited by their own internal conflicts relates to a certain tyrannical
image of the father, replaced by the symbol of authority known as the state. For this
transposition to occur, however, other sociopolitical and economic factors have to
support it. When extremism prevails, children are subject to an always tyrannical and
accusatory superego. In this system of education, the natural human predispositions are
deprived of any affective or intellectual dimension. God is mixed in with everything
and his omnipresence leaves no chance for the child’s mind to develop according to a
logic of curious questioning.
Superstition and fantasy prevail and impose themselves with impunity, since
the reference to God and his relentless will blocks any questioning beyond a certain
limit. It is enough to invoke the will of God to trigger erroneous interpretations and
delirium, following the logic of omnipotence of the narcissistic self, ready to call
on all deities. The final objective is to bring about narcissistic pleasure established
as the first divinity. However, the symbolic absence of parents is experienced with
indifference by children left to themselves and to “blocks of prohibitions.” Any
attempt at explanation, any audacious question is considered here to be blasphemous.
These psychological conditions predispose children to delinquency and an unhealthy
suggestibility. 17
17
On this subject, see Farid Bencheikh, La symbolique de l’acte criminal (Paris: L’Harmattan, 1998).
35