This summary is supported by the ETM TRT SHOM educational series which
is provided in its both
The purpose of the use of criminal violence by an offensive trauma manager (OTM) and also referenced herein as terrorist organization is to attack and damage the individual and systemic human ontology of its adversary. That strategic application of traumatic events is contrived to decimate or otherwise over time destroy the targets’ individual and collective, but primarily existential aspects of identities, which form the ontology’s most significant element. It pertains to the ongoingness/continuity and thus survival of both the referenced identity component, first, and the entity in its entirety, second. Achieving that goal also renders, proportionately, the targeted polity’s operational management and other decision making capacities’ less capable of self-protection. That is, the entity’s will to resist/fight defend-itself is decimated directly relative to the amount of existential identity sundered by the event.
Conversely, Etiotropically engineered and administered strategic restoration of those specific and critical-to-survival aspects of identity re strengthens will. Simultaneously, that strengthening re renders the OTM’s method moot, to mean eventually making the process whereby heinous events are created for the purpose of achieving political ends, obsolete.
Moreover and stressing non-linear aspects of this thesis, where destruction to identity can spread systemically throughout a collective, like a family, organization, local community, region, nation or civilization, it can also be rescinded/reversed/restored the same. When done strategically Etiotropically, then, restoration of a single identity can spread to the restoration of the targeted collective’s, again, same; but this occurs depending on the facilitation, including with emphasis the capacity to constrain collectively-influencing exogenous variables.
To bring about that restoration of individual and collective identity and will requires understanding and responding properly to three predominate stratifications of SHOM theory pertaining to perpetrator application of criminal violence to targeted communities.
1. Terror perpetrator organizations create a systemically installed pathological bond between themselves and their targets – survivors. Addressing the bond properly (Etiotropically AND strategically) can reverse the depreciating psychopathology on the target and turn the intended psychological destruction back upon the perpetrator: the terrorist organization’s management, and NOT JUST upon the immediate or direct killers who may otherwise already be dead.
2. Psychological trauma caused by criminal violence creates individual and systemic (meaning individually and collectively experienced and behaviorally manifested) natural survival responses from targets that present in two and apparently contradicting manifestations. That is, the surviving targeted individual and system will simultaneously attempt to
a. reconcile the internally retained trauma and
b. Maintain the trauma intact.
3. That non-linear or paradoxically inscribed ─ to mean drawn on and in to the victim psychology by the traumatic event ─ conflict presents individually and systemically behaviorally as attempts to help one’s self and at the same time support the perpetrator against themselves - the Survivors. The latter, manifested behaviorally as denial in the minimum and Stockholm syndrome in the more maximum prospect, is the primary feature of offensive trauma management upon which perpetrators rely for the success of their strategic use of criminal violence – terror. Where that apparent paradox presents, it can be exploited with the proper tools to, strategically. support the constructive element of the response to help the individual self and system and to preclude the destructive response that supports the perpetrator.
4. Certain cultural (exogenous) variables incorporated as helping methods will support destructive manifestations against constructive ones. Cordoning off those interfering variables during application of the management response facilitates both
a. reconciliation of the terrorism-caused trauma for the surviving individuals and system, and
b. emphatic ─ to mean unencumbered by the referenced psychological distractions (denial and Stockholm syndrome) caused by the trauma ─ address of the perpetrator.