Was John Brown A Narcissist

John Brown a religious terrorist
During the 1850s, the tension between the North and the South started to escalate. Slavery among other issues were creating sectionalism. John Brown’s attack on Harper’s Ferry in 1859 shocked the nation and changed how Americans view abolitionists. In American history, john brown is described as a martyr and hero who fought for the freedom of slaves until his execution. Some historians however, have described Brown’s actions as demented and even terrorist. Brown believed that slavery was morally wrong and needed to be abolished. His intentions were good as well as his cause however, the way he tried to create a change required extreme measures. Brown’s religious believes were a clear motivation for his violent

Since his early childhood, John Brown was exposed to Calvinist theology. This ideology was later crucial influence to his actions to free slaves. John Brown was born into a family of slavery-hating devout Calvinists . This fact is key to understand Brown’s ideals behind his actions. Calvinists believe that people’s purpose in life is to satisfy God. However, they also see humanity as predominantly corrupted and sinful because of the original sin brought by Adam and Eve. Brown’s judgement of society was strictly according to laws of God. For Brown the only way to cleanse this sinful world and please God was through the abolition of slavery. During Brown’s interview in the Charlestown prison, he stated “I think, my friend, you are guilty of a great wrong against God and humanity, -I say it without wishing to be offensive, -and it would be perfectly right for anyone to interfere with you so far as to free those you willfully and wickedly hold in bondage” . Brown fervidly believed that slavery was a great sin against God and a change needed to happen no matter what it would

After the incident Brown stated “It was absolutely necessary as a measure of self-defense and for the defense of others” . Such degree of violence inflicted upon others can’t be justified unless in an act of defense. But, in this case, Brown was not acting on self-defense, he was acting out of revenge because proslavery was winning over Kansas. In his essay, Gilbert stated that “Brown’s deeds conform to contemporary definitions of terrorism and his psychological predispositions are consistent with the terrorist model” . Gilbert argues that Brown could have been labeled a terrorist but because he was fighting for such a powerful and important cause, he was portrayed as a