[lit-ideas] Re: Examples of pathological epidemiology and their stressors

  • From: adriano paolo shaul gershom palma <palmaadriano@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2019 06:45:15 -0800

for the record, Breivik on Utoya killed some5 scores  of people who were
members of teh youth league of the labour organizations.
that Breivik is far more cretinous than 'unabomber' I have seldom any
doubt. his killing was a political act,in standard terminology the usual
nazi thug killing people of the left. I fail to see why that is
psychopathological, unless one thinks that any political fight is
psychopathology which defeates the argument's bones. Albeit for some
difficult to swallow, this is the form of political combat in europe now,
from Donbass to oslo

(Breivik also killed many by bombing the government wing in Oslo, quite
like McVeigh who bombed the federal building of Oklahoma city)
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

palma,  a paolo shaul םֹשׁ ְרֵגּ‎

Er selbst bevorzugte undurchdringlich Klarheit






On Sun, Apr 7, 2019 at 6:12 AM Lawrence Helm <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

In regard to Anders Breivik, he said a lot of things about his motives,
but what he did was kill a bunch of people, most of whom, if looking at
their photos means anything, were Norwegian, or at least Northern
Europeans.  He didn’t seek out just the people whose ethnicity or
immigration status he was opposed to.  He killed people indiscriminately in
order to publicize his manifesto . . . which is what Ted Kaczynski did as
well although Kaczynski killed or tried to kill people involved in the
technology he was opposed to.



“Two teams of court-appointed forensic psychiatrists
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_psychiatrist> examined Breivik
before his trial
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_Anders_Behring_Breivik>. The
first team diagnosed Breivik with paranoid schizophrenia
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranoid_schizophrenia>[20]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik#cite_note-20> but
after this initial finding was criticized,[21]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik#cite_note-21> a
second evaluation concluded that he was not psychotic during the attacks
but did have narcissistic personality disorder
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder>.[2
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik#cite_note-BBC100412-22>
[from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik]



Like Kaczynski, Breivik believed he knew best what his nation needed to
do.  Can you believe you are smarter than everyone else and not be
narcissistic?  Perhaps you can if you really are.  Milton at an early age
believed that he could write an epic that would be the greatest of his
age.  In the opinion of critics, he achieved his goal; so was he
narcissistic?  Does believing that you are the greatest poet of your age by
definition mean that you must be narcissistic?



I didn’t read Breivik’s manifesto, but I did read Ted Kaczynski’s, and
didn’t think Kaczynski was narcissistic.  What he believed didn’t sound so
very different from the arguments of Al Gore. . . but of course Al Gore may
have been . . .



“Since his imprisonment, Breivik has identified himself as a fascist
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascist>[29]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik#cite_note-29> and a
Nazi <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi>,[30]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik#cite_note-Dagen191115-30>
who practices Odinism <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odinism>[30]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik#cite_note-Dagen191115-30>
[31]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik#cite_note-autogeneratedvl-31>
and uses counterjihadist <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterjihad>
rhetoric to support ethno-nationalists
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethno-nationalists>.”[
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik#cite_note-Expo14-32>
ibid]



Perhaps we could be permitted to say that in these modern times a lot of
people have spent a lot of time putting names to the activities of people
who kill other people indiscriminately in order to get a population at
large to harken to their ideas; which ideas when you read them seem fairly
mundane.   I’m sure there are many Norwegians who object to non-integrating
immigrants, but if any of these Norwegians feel murderous, one might think
they would choose as their victims, these non-integrating immigrants and
not an indiscriminate number of their well-integrated fellow citizens.



General Sherman’s “march to the sea” was innovative when he did it.  While
U. S. Grant and Robert E. Lee were killing each other’s forces by the
thousands, Sherman took his army into the south in order to destroy, not
its people, but the resources the South needed to continue fighting.



Since that time, various nations during wars have attempted to do the same
thing through bombing, e.g., “During World War II, it was believed by many
military strategists of air power
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_power> that major victories could be
won by attacking industrial and political infrastructure, rather than
purely military targets.[15]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing_during_World_War_II#cite_note-15>
Strategic bombing often involved bombing areas inhabited by civilians and
some campaigns were deliberately designed to target civilian populations in
order to terrorize and disrupt their usual activities. . . The effect of
strategic bombing was highly debated during and after the war.[23]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing_during_World_War_II#cite_note-anesi.com-23>
[24]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing_during_World_War_II#cite_note-J.K._Galbraith_1958-24>
[25]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing_during_World_War_II#cite_note-Williamson_Murray_p._319-25>
[26]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing_during_World_War_II#cite_note-econ.yale.edu-26>
Both the *Luftwaffe* and RAF failed to deliver a knockout blow by
destroying enemy morale. However some argued that strategic bombing of
non-military targets could significantly reduce enemy industrial capacity
and production[27]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing_during_World_War_II#cite_note-Buckley_1998,_p._165-27>
[28]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing_during_World_War_II#cite_note-Murray_1983,_p._253-28>
and in the opinion of its interwar period
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interwar_period> proponents, the surrender
of Japan <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrender_of_Japan> vindicated
strategic bombing.[29
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing_during_World_War_II#cite_note-29>
[from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_bombing_during_World_War_II]



With these as examples, can we apply terms to individuals and applicable
national leaders who engage in this sort of killing in such a way as to
exclude it as a pathological social epidemic?  Suicide, when there was a
rash of them triggered by such stressors as *The Sorrows of young Werther*,
has been termed an example of psychiatric epidemiology.  So why not see
indiscriminate killing of others as another form of psychiatric
epidemiology?



John Berryman’s father committed suicide and years later John did the same
thing:  ‘In "Dream Song #143", he wrote, "That mad drive [to commit
suicide] wiped out my childhood. I put him down/while all the same on forty
years I love him/stashed in Oklahoma/besides his brother Will". In "Dream
Song #145", he also wrote the following lines about his father:



he only, very early in the morning,
rose with his gun and went outdoors by my window
and did what was needed.

I cannot read that wretched mind, so strong
& so undone. I've always tried. I–I'm
trying to forgive
whose frantic passage, when he could not live
an instant longer, in the summer dawn
left Henry to live on.[2]
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Berryman#cite_note-2>[from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Berryman]



Might we perhaps conclude that we are a species with very few instincts
and so need to be taught all that we need to know to function in society.
If we are taught as John Berryman, that suicide is an acceptable way to
solve one’s problems, then we are at the very least influenced by this
teaching and some percentage of people so taught will sometime later on use
this method.



Lawrence







Other related posts: