Why are we living in an age of anger is it because of the 50-year rage cycle?

From passive-aggressive notes on ambulance windscreens to bilious political discourse, it feels as though society is suddenly consumed by fury. What is to blame for this outpouring of aggressivenes?

A neighbour objected to a young couple from Newcastle being naked in their own home.” We are sick of seeing big bums, big boob and little willy ,” was the core message of the note, crescendoing to:” We will report you both for indecent exposure .” It is such a small thing, banal, without consequence. It connects to no wider narrative and imparts nothing but the bubbling inconvenience of human beings living near each other. Yet when Karin Stone( one of the nakeds) posted the note on Facebook, 15,000 people pored over it. An Australian radio show interviewed her. I have got to be honest, I am heavily emotionally invested in the story myself and I do not regret a second of the time I have expended reading about it.

There is a through-line to these spurts of feeling we get from spectatorship: the subject matter is not important. It could be human rights abuse or a party-wall conflict; it does not matter, so long as it delivers a shot of righteous rage. Bile connects each issue. I look at that note, the prurience and prissiness, the mashup of capital and lower-case letters, the unlikeliness that its author has a smaller hobo or a bigger willy, and I feel sure they voted for Brexit. The neighbours are delighted by their abhorrence for these vigorous, lusty newlyweds, I am delighted by my abhorrence for the neighbours, radio listeners in Australia are delighted. We watch rage and we meet it with our own, always wanting more.

There was the mean note left on the car of a disabled female (” I witnessed you and your young able-bodied daughter … walk towards the precinct with no sign of disability “); the half-crazed dyspepsia of the woman whose driveway was blocked briefly by paramedics while they tried to save someone’s life. Last week, Highways England felt moved to launching a campaign against road rage, spurred by 3, 446 recorded instances in a year of motorists driving straight through roadworks. Violent crime has not gone up- well, it has, but this is thought mainly to reflect better reporting practises- but violent fantasies are ablaze. Political discourse is drenched in fury. The things people want to do to Diane Abbott and Luciana Berger induce my eyes pop out of my head.

A
‘ Thanks for blocking my driveway’ … a note left on an ambulance in the West Midlands. Photo: West Midlands Ambulance Service

But what exactly are we looking at? Does any of this have a wider social meaning? Does it place us at a perilous phase on the curve of history, on the tinderbox of a grand detonation? Or is it that some things- cars, social media- are really bad for our mental health?

There is a discipline known as cliodynamics, developed at the start of the century by the scientist Peter Turchin, which plots historical events by a series of mathematical measures. Some are obvious- equality- and some take a bit of unpacking (” elite overproduction “, for example; as a consequence of inequality, there are periods in history when there are too many extremely rich people for the positions of power that extremely rich people typically occupy. This outcomes in them running rascal and buying themselves into power by hosing fund at elections. Donald Trump is the ultimate human face of upper-class overproduction ). These measures yield a map of history in which you can see spikes of rage approximately every 50 years: 1870, 1920, 1970( you have to allow a little wiggle room to take in the first world war and 1968 ). Cycles of violence are not always unproductive- they take in civil right, union and suffragette movements. Indeed, all social movements of consequence start with unrest, whether in the form of strike action, protest or riot. Some situate economics at the heart of the social mood: the Kondratiev wave, which lasts between 40 and 60 years( call it 50 and it will correspond neatly with the cycle of violence ), describes the modern world economy in cycles of high and low growth, where stagnation always corresponds with unrest.

David Andress is a professor of history at the University of Portsmouth and the author of Cultural Dementia, a fascinating account of how the slash-and-burn fury of the present political climate is made possible only by wilfully forgetting the past. He counsels against what could become an indolent understanding of history- if everything is a wave and the waves simply happen, what is there to discover?- but he lets that” everything has to come back to economics unless you’re rich. Economics is about dearth and insecurity turns very quickly into indignation and scapegoating .”

” As a historian and as a teacher, I’m always trying to get people to understand that societies in general are violent and hierarchical places ,” he says.” Person like you and me have wanted societies to be less violent and hierarchical and we have worked at that. We’ve never actually succeeded. We’ve managed to persuade people to take their foot off other people’s throats, when they felt secure enough .” Anger is remarkable not in and of itself, but when it becomes so widespread that it feels like the dominant culture force. What is notable to Andress is the counterfactual- the periods in history not marked by ferocity.” Antagonism never goes away. That is what has induced the postwar project quite exceptional, the EU project quite exceptional .” Ah, the EU. Perhaps another time.

Donald
‘ The ultimate human face of elite overproduction’ … Donald Trump on the campaign trail in 2015. Photograph: Mike Stone/ Reuters

The psychotherapeutic perspective would not reject these economic factors , nor argue that anger is a new phenomenon. But there are elements of the human emotional journey that are novel and are driven by modern conditions. Aaron Balick, a psychotherapist and the author of a perceptive and surprisingly readable academic account, The Psychodynamics of Social Networking, says:” I suppose for sure fury is more conveyed. What you assure of it is a consequence of emotional contagion, which I think social media is partly responsible for. There’s an anger-bandwagon effect: person conveys it and this drives someone else to express it as well .” Psychologically speaking, the important thing is not the emotion, but what you do with it; whether you vent, process or suppress it.

We are in an age where the trigger event can be something as trivial as a cranky git who does not like nudity. Thanks to Facebook, 15,000 people can get a righteous thrill of expressed rage. Wherever we are on the Kondratiev curve, ours is a materially different life experience to one in which you would only come together in frenzy for something serious, such as destroying a ploughshare or burning a witch.

” Hysteria is not a particularly politically correct term any more, because it’s kind of misogynist, but it does have a technological meaning ,” says Balick.” A hysterical emotional response is when you’re having too much emotion, because you’re not in touch with the foundational feeling. An example would be office bitching. Everybody in the office is bitching and it becomes a hysterical negativity that never treats itself; nobody is taking it forwards .” This has the hammer thud of deep truth. I have worked in only a couple of offices, but there was always a gentle hubbub of whinging, in which important and intimate connects were forged by shared grievance, but it was underpinned by a deliberate relinquish of power. You complained exactly because you did not intend to address the grievance meaningfully.

Social media has given us a style to transmute that fury from the workplace- which often we do not have the power to change- to every other region of life. You can go on Mumsnet to get angry with other people’s lazy husbands and interfering mother-in-laws; Twitter to find camaraderie in ferocity about politics and punctuation; Facebook for rage-offs about people who screamed at a newborn on a train or left their dog in a hot car. These social forums” enable hysterical contagion”, says Balick, but that does not mean it is always unproductive. The instance he uses of a groundswell of infectious indignation that became a movement is the Arab spring, but you could point to petitions websites such as 38 Degrees and Avaaz or crowdfunded justice projects. Most broad, collaborative calls for change begin with a narrative that enrages people.

To distinguish “good” rage from “bad” anger- indeed, to determine whether anything productive could come of a dedicated spurt of rage- it is worth considering the purpose of indignation.” Its purpose is to maintain personal boundaries. So, if someone crossings you, get in your space, insults you, touches you, you’re going to get angry and the productive use of anger is to say:’ Fuck off ,'” Balick says. The complicating feature of social media is that” someone might be stepping on our identity or our notion system “. So, the natural sense of scale you get in the offline world- a stranger could run over your toes with a shopping streetcar but, being a stranger, would find it hard to traduce your essential nature- is collapsed in the virtual one. In the act of broadcasting who we are- what we believe, what we look like, what we are eating, who we love- we offer up a vast stretching of personal border that could be invaded by anyone, even by collision. Usually it is not road traffic accidents, though; usually they do it on purpose.

The
‘” You wouldn’t like me when I’m angry” is a curious catchphrase … But it manages to make sense on a deeper, primeval level .’ Photograph: Universal TV/ Kobal/ Rex/ Shutterstock

However, if it gives you a fillip to lie in bed checking whatever news or chat feed nourishes you, then experience a short thrill of indignation, is that a bad thing? Could it only be furnishing the insignificant boost we used to get from smoking? There is certainly a hormonal answer (” There’s always a physical show; emotions aren’t a made-up thing ,” Balick tells ), but it is not an obvious one: Neus Herrero, a researcher at the University of Valencia, “stimulated” fury in 30 humen( with “first-person” remarks) and found a variety of apparent contradictions. Cortisol, which you would expect to go up, since it is the stress hormone, goes down; testosterone goes up and heart rate and arterial tension come up. Herrera discovered an oddity in” motivational direction”- usually, positive emotions make you want to get closer to the source, while negative ones attain you want to withdraw. Anger has a” motivation of closeness”, which Herrera explains simply:” Normally, when we get angry, we present a natural tendency to get closer to what induced us angry to try to eliminate it .”

Like any stimulant, it has addictive properties: you are habituated to it and start to rove around go looking for things to construct you angry. Rage has an illusion of power, the way the Unbelievable Hulk takes peculiar pride in the destructive potential of his strong emotion.” You wouldn’t like me when I’m angry” is such a curious catchphrase; the only logical reply is:” I don’t like anyone when they are angry .” But it manages to make sense on a deeper, primeval level.

The important consequences are not for your own health, but instead for that of society as a whole. Unprocessed fury pollutes the social realm. Every outburst legitimises the next. And we have landed- I like to think by accident- on a technology that perpetuates it and amplifies it, occasionally productively, but more often to no purpose at all. Writ large on a world stage- take Trump or Viktor Orban, the prime minister of Hungary, venting unmediated ferocity for political impact- we can see how denaturing it is, how it gates off all other, less exhilarating replies, such as empathy.

People getting so angry about traffic cones that they drive straight into them, while effing and jeffing at a workman in a hi-vis jacket, may or may not be a harbinger of greater social upheaval, but I recollect the John Major years and his cones hotline. Whatever cones signify, it is never anything good.

Make sure to visit: CapGeneration.com

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s