I think people might have inherent need to find something to fight against. The inherent need and its target might have nothing to do with each other. That something is just a good target, and if we name a target, at the same time we might think our need is being "concretized". But that need will not be satisfied until we really find out what it's all about. The targets can and will change, the need will stay.

True Detective is a good series. Even if it's just a TV-series, kind of something similar is said in it: almost all the people have something they feel guilty for. It might be something that has happened a long, long time ago and that no longer holds any concrete position in their lives. Usually, the most impacting emotional traumas are rooted in the childhood, when people didn't have the tools to process what is happening for them and why. Anyhow, people might for example confess crimes if they felt that by doing so, they can get rid of that inherent guilt that follows them everywhere. It can be used as a questioning method: try to get a grip of that painful feeling of guilt and the suspect melts in your hands.

But the guilt is rooted somewhere far deeper. The need to find something concretely accountable for people's inner dissonances is never going to work. Because when the dissonances were planted inside us, it happened in the past. We can not go there anymore. We can only analyze what has happened and then, understand ourselves better. That might also free us from the constant search for finding things that we could hold accountable ("targets"), because we then would understand how mindless it is.

This might sound like pathologization but I think everyone should take a deep look inside them before looking for things from the external world. It's like people try to find parallels from the outside world for something that is mostly inside them. Thus we create confrontations, not knowing most of the anger and other things related to it are just unsolved ghosts from the past acting up.

Sounds very pseudo, but things like this might be very hard to put under scientific testing. They might remain as pseudo forever, but maybe they can still work as useful models.