On the Trail of Delusion, Episode 14, Scott Maudsley on Oswald's Motive

[Fred Litwin]

It was great fun chatting with Scott Maudsley about Lee Harvey Oswald.

On the Trail of Delusion, Episode 14, Scott Maudsley on Oswald's Antisocial Personality Disorder.

https://youtu.be/G8mTgyBZAJc?si=DF15spWg-bF8LWfX

[Steve M. Galbraith]

It was great fun chatting with Scott Maudsley about Lee Harvey Oswald.

On the Trail of Delusion, Episode 14, Scott Maudsley on Oswald's Antisocial Personality Disorder.

The problem, in part, for me with this diagnosis of who Oswald was is that this disorder, his anti-social behavior (which clearly was there), didn't appear earlier (I'm not referring the diagnosis as a teen), particularly when he was in the Soviet Union. There, in Minsk, he was mostly a well-adjusted person; he had friends, he dated, he socialized, he married and had a child (yes, we have that strange attempted suicide or faked attempt: not something a CIA fake defector I think would do). He had a normal life. It was only when he came back that this isolation, this withdrawal into a fantasy world began. It happened here, in the US and wasn't there beforehand.

As Priscilla McMillan wrote: "The anger and violence that were to characterize Oswald’s behavior after his return to the United States were barely visible during his time in Minsk."

[Richard Smith]

Oswald was a malcontent who externalized the cause of his discontent.  In other words, he felt special and blamed others including society for ignoring him.  If you want attention but are ignored it is not a happy situation.  In the Soviet Union Oswald was, at least for a short time, someone of note.  It temporarily satisfied his desire for others to pay attention to him to be considered unique in that circumstance.  People were initially interested in him.  However, once the spotlight dimmed and he was relegated to a mundane existence, he was unhappy again and left.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Oswald was a malcontent who externalized the cause of his discontent.  In other words, he felt special and blamed others including society for ignoring him.  If you want attention but are ignored it is not a happy situation.  In the Soviet Union Oswald was, at least for a short time, someone of note.  It temporarily satisfied his desire for others to pay attention to him to be considered unique in that circumstance.  People were initially interested in him.  However, once the spotlight dimmed and he was relegated to a mundane existence, he was unhappy again and left.

Again it's that violent streak that emerged when he came back: "The anger and violence that were to characterize Oswald’s behavior after his return to the United States were barely visible during his time in Minsk."

Even after the short period of attention in Minsk, when people became bored with him, that violent side didn't show up. Marina said he would sometimes slap her with an open hand; in the US it was a closed fist and harder. He really only started violently unraveling when he returned. The Mailer book included dozens of interviews with friends, associates, colleagues of Oswald's when he was in Minsk, people who knew him. To a person they all said they couldn't believe he could murder JFK. They didn't see this dark side to him. He disliked the USSR but didn't externalize an empty life by blaming society; something he did in the US. He was paranoid about the FBI not the KGB (who followed him much more closely). And he ridiculed Americans, looked down at them for their beliefs, said they were naive about how they were being exploited. He never did that in the USSR (right, he knew he'd get into trouble if he did).

But you're correct and sort of making my point: this anti-social behavior came and went; it wasn't ingrained from childhood. When he returned from Minsk and became a nobody again he lashed out the world that he thought was mistreating him. He was quite angry at the FBI, he thought they were persecuting him and was the reason he kept losing jobs and failing. Remember what he told the Soviets about the "notorious FBI" going after him? I don't think that was all play acting in order to get a visa. He believed it.

Anyway, Robert Oswald said that "If Lee had been forced to remain in the Soviet Union he would have ended up shooting Khrushchev." That may have been more tongue-in-cheek than true; but again, that type of angry guy wasn't there in Minsk. Maybe it would have emerged over time; which I think was Robert's point: Oswald was going to be miserable anywhere.

[John Iacoletti]

Such propaganda.
1. Personality pattern disturbance is not the same thing as antisocial personality disorder.
2. No competent psychiatrist would diagnose a personality disorder in a child.
3. An evaluation of a 13-year-old cannot be relied on to diagnose an adult.
4. Gesturing while holding a pen-knife used for whittling is not the same thing as “pulling a knife” on somebody.
5. None of these things tell you a single thing about who killed President Kennedy.

[Tom Graves]

An evaluation of a 13-year-old cannot be relied on to diagnose an adult.

I don't know about yours, but people's personalities are basically set by the time they turn thirteen.

FWIW, I've got a feeling yours was set when you were nine or ten.

Oh well, at least you realize Trump is a disaster for our country and a godsend for Vladimir Putin.

[Richard Smith]

Again it's that violent streak that emerged when he came back: "The anger and violence that were to characterize Oswald’s behavior after his return to the United States were barely visible during his time in Minsk."

Even after the short period of attention in Minsk, when people became bored with him, that violent side didn't show up. Marina said he would sometimes slap her with an open hand; in the US it was a closed fist and harder. He really only started violently unraveling when he returned. The Mailer book included dozens of interviews with friends, associates, colleagues of Oswald's when he was in Minsk, people who knew him. To a person they all said they couldn't believe he could murder JFK. They didn't see this dark side to him. He disliked the USSR but didn't externalize an empty life by blaming society; something he did in the US. He was paranoid about the FBI not the KGB (who followed him much more closely). And he ridiculed Americans, looked down at them for their beliefs, said they were naive about how they were being exploited. He never did that in the USSR (right, he knew he'd get into trouble if he did).

But you're correct and sort of making my point: this anti-social behavior came and went; it wasn't ingrained from childhood. When he returned from Minsk and became a nobody again he lashed out the world that he thought was mistreating him. He was quite angry at the FBI, he thought they were persecuting him and was the reason he kept losing jobs and failing. Remember what he told the Soviets about the "notorious FBI" going after him? I don't think that was all play acting in order to get a visa. He believed it.

Anyway, Robert Oswald said that "If Lee had been forced to remain in the Soviet Union he would have ended up shooting Khrushchev." That may have been more tongue-in-cheek than true; but again, that type of angry guy wasn't there in Minsk. Maybe it would have emerged over time; which I think was Robert's point: Oswald was going to be miserable anywhere.

I think Oswald was a guy simmering below the surface about his circumstances like a volcano.  Sometimes there were signs of a possible eruption but mostly not.  That doesn't mean he was never going to erupt.  It's sometimes easy to forget that he was only 24 when he assassinated the president.  It wasn't like he had lived a long peaceful life as an adult before committing a violent act.  And I don't necessarily think of Oswald as a "violent" person.  He was discontent with his place in society and blamed others for that.  He was exploring ways to address that such as his defection and extreme political views.  When all that failed, his path eventually narrowed to that of an anti-hero that decided to resort to violent methods. 

[Steve M. Galbraith]

I think Oswald was a guy simmering below the surface about his circumstances like a volcano.  Sometimes there were signs of a possible eruption but mostly not.  That doesn't mean he was never going to erupt.  It's sometimes easy to forget that he was only 24 when he assassinated the president.  It wasn't like he had lived a long peaceful life as an adult before committing a violent act.  And I don't necessarily think of Oswald as a "violent" person.  He was discontent with his place in society and blamed others for that.  He was exploring ways to address that such as his defection and extreme political views.  When all that failed, his path eventually narrowed to that of an anti-hero that decided to resort to violent methods.

I'll agree with almost all of that - the accounts of him beating the heck out of Marina suggest a violent person, no? - but my only point was that the Oswald of Minsk was not the Oswald of Dallas. In Minsk he led a stable life with friends and other interests. The angry, withdrawn, anti-social Oswald of Texas was simply not there (and Marina doesn't mention anything simmering beneath the surface). Priscilla McMillan made the observation that she thinks Oswald regretted leaving Minsk, that it was a good life for him. But once he applied to leave he couldn't reverse the Soviet bureaucracy (something he knew about and detested).

He became completely unraveled when he returned, when his life hit a dead end (due to perceived American injustices) and he had nowhere else to go. But he was still a political person. So shooting JFK was probably a mix of impossible-to-untangle reasons, personal and political.

I'll just add: given his experiences in life, this isolation as a child, the repeated failures, the insults he faced (real and imagined) that the idea he would be a CIA agent or asset defending the same country that he grew to dislike, that he believed mistreated and was unfair to him, is utterly illogical. He hated the US; he wasn't going to defend it. But this is JFK conspiracy world and illogical ideas are what they traffic in as long as it supports a conspiracy.