By Denis Hay
Description
Human instinct not to kill is a powerful force. Learn why killing feels unnatural, how training overrides instinct, and why soldiers carry deep trauma home.
🎧 Prefer to listen to this article? Press play
Introduction
You probably feel uneasy even thinking about taking a life. That feeling is natural. It reflects the human instinct not to kill, your biology trying to protect you. The human instinct not to kill is one of the strongest moral barriers we possess, and it is part of what enables humans to survive as social, cooperative beings.
Yet our political and military systems often expect people to override that instinct. Millions of Australians know someone who came home from war carrying emotional wounds that never fully healed.
Statistic Snapshot
The Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide found that veterans in Australia are far more likely to die by suicide compared to the general population. This is a sign of what happens when someone is pushed to act against their deepest moral instincts.
So let us ask two simple questions. If humans evolved to protect one another, why does our government rely on systems that undermine that instinct? And if Australia has dollar sovereignty, meaning it can fund peace and prevention without financial limits, why are we still training people for violence?
As Australians, we deserve answers and a better way forward.
Why Killing Does Not Come Naturally
Evidence Soldiers Historically Avoided Firing
For most of history, soldiers resisted killing. This is not a myth. It is documented in military records. During World War I, officers reported soldiers firing over the enemy’s heads. In World War II, historian S.L.A. Marshall observed that up to 75 per cent of US soldiers did not fire, a pattern confirmed by infantry trainers across nations.
The trend carried into the Vietnam War. Soldiers often admitted to firing high on purpose or deliberately missing targets, especially early in their deployments. They were not afraid. They were human. This resistance comes from the human instinct not to kill, a deep emotional barrier that has shaped human behaviour for thousands of years. Their natural instinct resisted taking a life.
You might now wonder why modern firing rates are much higher. The answer is not that people have changed. It is that training has changed.
After World War II, military leaders analysed these historical patterns and concluded that the human instinct not to kill was so strong that older training methods could not overcome it. This led to a new form of training designed to bypass moral judgment and turn shooting into a rapid, conditioned reflex.
Modern forces introduced:
- Human-shaped targets instead of circles
- Reward loops that praise fast, accurate firing
- High stress live fire drills
- Language that labels people as enemies rather than humans
- Repetition that links shooting with approval and belonging
These techniques reshape human behaviour by reducing the emotional weight of killing. Instead of a conscious moral decision, it becomes an automatic reaction. This process works because it suppresses the human instinct not to kill and replaces it with conditioned responses. Soldiers fire before they have time to reflect. This is why firing rates have risen sharply from Vietnam to the present day.
The instinct remains. Humanity remains. The systems work hard to suppress it.
The Problem: Why Australians Feel Stuck
How Systems Override Your Natural Instinct
You were taught from childhood that harming others is wrong. Yet military training uses military training psychology to weaken that instinct. This is done through conditioning, repetition, environmental stress, and emotional detachment. These methods create automatic responses that bypass empathy.
Here is the uncomfortable truth. These systems were built on the belief that the human instinct not to kill needed to be removed for militaries to function. But should any democratic government adopt training that undermines empathy?
You can explore this idea further in Why Australia Must Invest in Peace on Social Justice Australia.
What This Means for Ordinary Citizens
When soldiers return home, the struggle is not limited to what they saw. The real battle often begins when they try to live with what they were trained to do. Research from the American Psychological Association shows that killing in combat is one of the strongest predictors of long-term PTSD. The RAND Corporation reports similar findings, linking trauma to moral conflict.
The harm does not stop with the soldier. Families absorb the pain. Communities carry the weight. And yet, this suffering is often dismissed as an unavoidable part of military service.
If something causes this much lifelong damage, why are we not questioning the systems that create it?
The Impact: What Australians Are Experiencing
Everyday Effects of Conditioning
You may have seen this in someone you know. A loved one returns from deployment and appears to be different. Less connected. Easily startled and overwhelmed by guilt or shame. These symptoms reflect the psychological impact of killing, which experts Jonathan Shay and Brett Litz describe as moral injury.
Moral injury is not a disorder. It is a wound to the conscience. It affects identity, self-worth, trust, and the ability to feel safe.
This is the cost of overriding the human instinct not to kill. When that instinct is broken, the mind struggles to make sense of actions that violate the human instinct not to kill, leading to deep emotional conflict.
For more on how public money could be better used to support peace, you can read Defence Spending Peace Investment on Social Justice Australia.
Who Benefits From War and Conditioning
Let us keep this simple. War benefits a small number of actors. Defence contractors, political decision-makers, and arms manufacturers benefit from conflict. Ordinary Australians do not. Veterans do not. Families do not. You do not.
Public money should serve a public purpose; yet, billions are invested in systems that require breaking people’s moral instincts, rather than building peace.
Why do we allow systems that harm our own people for the benefit of a few?
The Solution: What Must Be Done
Australia’s Monetary Sovereignty and a Better Path
Australia has dollar sovereignty. The government cannot run out of its own currency. This means we can fully fund peace building, diplomacy, humanitarian assistance, regional partnerships, and conflict prevention. We can afford to invest in stability without asking soldiers to carry moral injuries for life.
Imagine an Australia that leads with cooperation, not confrontation. Imagine a defence force centred on humanitarian action rather than aggressive conditioning. Why should we accept less when better is possible?
You can learn more about public purpose spending and reform in other Social Justice Australia articles that cover MMT and national investment.
Policy Solutions and What Australians Should Demand
A peaceful and humane future requires real commitments:
- A national peace-building and diplomacy strategy
- Transparency around defence contractor influence
- Education that reduces militarisation
- Comprehensive support for veterans and families
- Training reforms that respect human moral limits
- Regional cooperation programs that reduce conflict
- Full recognition of moral injury as a national health priority
We can do better. We must do better. Nothing stands in the way except political will.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why do humans naturally avoid killing?
Humans have evolved empathy systems, including mirror neurons, that create emotional discomfort when we harm others. This is why the human instinct to avoid killing is so powerful.
How does military training psychology override empathy?
By using repetition, reflex drills, desensitisation, and language control. These methods reduce emotional responses and replace them with automatic reactions.
What is moral injury in soldiers?
Moral injury occurs when an individual acts against their core moral principles. It is linked to guilt, shame, trauma, and long-term psychological harm.
Did soldiers historically avoid firing?
Yes. Historical evidence from WWI, WWII, and Vietnam shows many soldiers deliberately fired high or avoided firing due to natural empathy.
Final Thoughts
Your human instinct not to kill reflects the best parts of being human. When governments override that instinct through conditioning, the results are devastating. The psychological damage lasts. It lasts because the human instinct not to kill is part of our natural sense of morality and connection. Families suffer. Communities feel the weight.
Australia has the economic power to choose a peaceful future. Let us use dollar sovereignty to invest in diplomacy, cooperation, and well-being. Imagine an Australia where peace is our strength and humanity is our guide.
What’s Your Experience
Have you seen how the human instinct not to kill shapes someone you know, or wondered why our systems teach people to override that instinct? Share your thoughts below.
Call to Action
We’d Love to Hear from You
If you found this article insightful, explore more about political reform and Australia’s monetary sovereignty on the Social Justice Australia website.
Please share your thoughts through our Reader Feedback form, check out what others are saying on our Testimonials page, or scroll down and leave a comment below. Your voice helps shape future content.
Spread the Word
Change starts with conversations. Share this article with friends, family, or your social networks so more Australians can see what’s possible. Every share helps build momentum for a fairer society.
Keep Independent Journalism Alive
We’re 100% reader-supported, no ads, no corporate strings, just honest, truth-driven journalism. If our work has informed or inspired you, we invite you to consider contributing. Even $5, or whatever you can spare, helps us keep publishing and reaching more Australians.
Donate Now – one-time or monthly.
Already donated? Share the love by leaving us a quick review on Google to help others find us.
This article was originally published on Social Justice Australia
Keep Independent Journalism Alive – Support The AIMN
Dear Reader,
Since 2013, The Australian Independent Media Network has been a fearless voice for truth, giving public interest journalists a platform to hold power to account. From expert analysis on national and global events to uncovering issues that matter to you, we’re here because of your support.
Running an independent site isn’t cheap, and rising costs mean we need you now more than ever. Your donation – big or small – keeps our servers humming, our writers digging, and our stories free for all.
Join our community of truth-seekers. Donate via PayPal or credit card via the button below, or bank transfer [BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969] and help us keep shining a light.
With gratitude, The AIMN Team
Be the first to comment