We will tell you that it is not easy blogging about the Virginia Tech murders. We're not Dr. Phil nor are we psychologists. The murders bring back memories of 9/11/2001, when confusion and frustration reigned, and everyone seemed to concentrate on dead bodies and fear, rather than people getting out and being in safety. While administrators and police were in mass confusion on how to handle the situation, students were locked down. A brave teacher who survived the Holocaust sacrificed his life for his students, who managed to escape. The numbers could have been much higher than 33, had the shooter not taken his own life.
If there was ever a grand manifestation of malignant narcissism, the murders of 33 VT students certainly qualifies. Narcissism - the act of elevating yourself to a God-like status - is bad enough. Malignant narcissism takes it to a frighteningly dangerous, cult-like height. Dictators in the world didn't get evil reputations by being milquetoasts. The world's worst cult figures and dictators have brought malignant narcissism to the forefront, thinly disguised as charisma. Often, charisma can bring about good feelings among people without making them feel at the edge. Malignant narcissism makes people wonder if they can survive the day without angering the "powers that be."
Cho Seung-Hui managed to prove how dangerous malignant narcissism can be. He could have kept himself quiet and out of the way, but there were too many warning signs around him. The violent plays,
the self-indulgent manifestos, blaming everyone else, and scaring everyone in the campus with his antisocial and violent fantasies catapulted Cho into a notoriety only reserved for cold-blooded assassins and the most evil of evil incarnate. Cho discharged his malignant narcissism through the barrel of a gun before turning it on himself, itself a selfish and pitiful act that will gain him no fans.
Cho's actions also brought up new - and hysterical - calls for gun control. In this age of political correctness and passive submission, the last thing we should be doing is trying to take the ability to practice self-defense, with or without weapons, away from those who know its power and use it with extensive training, a sharp mindset, and utmost discrimination, and only when in extreme danger. Cho could never have "engaged in a dialogue" and appeased to stop shooting. No skilled hostage negotiator would have survived five seconds attempting to quell Cho, as Cho's mindset was stuck on killing as many of his purported targets as possible. No politician, no lobby group, and no non-governmental organization could have come to the campus and convinced Cho that "shooting was not the answer." To Cho, shooting was an answer, and the only solution, to his problems.
The Virginia Tech students - still shaken to the core by these acts of domestic terrorism - are putting the blame for this right where it belongs: on Cho. The students could have taken the easy way out and blamed his actions on convenient bugaboos, and tied it up with calling for resignations and arrests of politicians who didn't protect them sufficiently. They could have also allied themselves with other groups with PhD's in quack religion, agitation and troublemaking, pouring gasoline into an already heady fire. They could have also elevated Cho to a legend, a martyr, and an anti-hero. They could have also easily denied that "shootings only happen in urban areas with high crime" as easily as they can order a coffee at Starbucks. When that reality comes to rural areas, that cant phrase makes obvious the utter denial of fools who try to wish things away, like conflict and war.
The VT students chose to band together instead, similar to 9/11/01.
They bypassed the easy sound bites for something more concrete and difficult: moving on after these murders. They will attend funerals, light candles, and talk to psychologists, and deal with nightmares, each less vivid than the next. They will move on, wary that the next Cho will be in their midst, and not necessarily on their college campus.
