I'm sure that many of us felt numb when we first heard that a small plane had intentionally crashed into a building housing the IRS in Austin, TX on February 18, 2010. We still have memories of 9/11 and the shock that followed those attacks. For me, the attacks in Austin had special resonance, because the building that got hit was only a few miles from my house along a route that I run along regularly.
Perhaps because of my proximity to the scene of the attack, I spent some time in the hours after hearing about the crash reading about the events and looking at the long note that Joseph Stack, the alleged pilot, left on his website.
What struck me about this note is that it is a classic rumination. A few weeks ago, I wrote about research by my colleague Jamie Pennebaker that looks at the benefits of writing about traumatic events. At first glance, Stack's letter would seem to contradict this work. After all, Stack also claims to have written extensively about his problems in the hope of helping himself.
In order for writing to help defuse anger and anxiety, though, the writer needs to grapple with the causes and consequences that are causing that anger. Importantly, they need to create a story or representation of the traumatic events that helps to disconnect the causes of the anger and anxiety from the present.
Instead, Stack ruminates about his problems. Rumination (from the same word for animals chewing cud) involves a continued cycle of thoughts. These thoughts can actually heighten anger and anxiety when they reinforce the belief that there are causal forces that are out there that will cause harm to the ruminating person.
So, how can you break this cycle?
One thing that can be useful is to communicate with other people who can help you to think differently about your current situation. All of the initial reports about Joseph Stack are that he rarely talked to anyone about politics or his own situation. His note does mention his involvement over the years with groups that had similar beliefs about taxes.
In the modern era, the internet has had a paradoxical effect on our ability to communicate. On the one hand, the internet has opened up the possibility of conversing with people around the world. I am able to email and collaborate on projects with people everywhere.
At the same time, the overwhelming number of people on the net means that we can easily find like-minded communities. Before the global internet, when we talked primarily to people in our local area, we were forced to spend some time discussing issues with people who held different opinions than our own. Now, we can choose media outlets that are likely to agree with what we believe. We can gather in email groups and chat rooms with people who hold opinions similar to our own. A person who wants to insulate himself from conflicting opinions can do so with relative ease.
But if you find yourself in a spiral of rumination in which your anger and anxiety are growing, then you need people who will disagree with you. Those disagreements help you to see alternative perspectives that may bring a broader context to your life events.
To me, then, the most important lesson we can draw from Joseph Stack's note and his alleged attack is that we must all make an effort to reach out to the community around us. We must get in the habit of talking about the things that trouble us, not just with people who are likely to agree with us, but also with those who can bring a fresh perspective.
