Whether we're discussing Kaczynski or Bundy or Oswald or Harris or even Hitler, it is commonplace but oversimplifying to credit a single incident or factor to a person's personality and ultimate choices. It's convenient for stories of fiction meant to be relatable to the laity, but even then, the notion of a single issue fails to explain Hannibal Lecter, or Batman. (Heck even the Phantom of the Opera serves as a deconstruction)
This is also to say that no single factor can be excluded as insignificant or even minor. In the case of Kaczynski's MKULTRA experience, even if it was a single experience, it could have triggered an epiphany or just another brick in the wall.
Figuring out retroactively why people do crazy things is like trying to trace from a hurricane back to the butterflies that were pivotal in its inception. We can determine common risk factors which increase probability, but not to a useful degree.
And yes, that is terrifying because it means we don't know who will spark off.
But getting back to the original point, if you're looking to raise a wise king, a stable environment with consistent routine and conscious caregivers can go a long way.
I'm reminded of a friend of mine who, when considering getting a dog wanted a smart dog. She got a Labradoodle (Labrador-Poodle mix, in this case an accidental one) who was very bright, but also willful. When we think of smart dogs we think of ones who recognize commands and remember a lot of tricks but are otherwise obedient. We don't think they're going to figure out how to open refrigerators and childproof cupboards and eat all our food.
Kids are this to the next magnitude. We can expect our children are going to outsmart us and try to get away with stuff. We can only attempt to prepare them so that by the time they do, their better judgement goes with them (e.g. to find a safe environment to experiment with drugs, or a safe partner and protection when getting sexual). Add someone who is bright and talented to that, and their adventures might get ambitious, especially once they figure out that the schools and society hate our young people and regard them as a subversive factor intent on disrupting the status quo.
Also from Family Snapshot:
All turned quiet-I have been here before A Lonely boy hiding behind the front door My friends have all gone home There's my toy gun on the floor Come back Mum and Dad You're growing apart You know that I'm growing up sad I need some attention I shoot into the light -- Peter Gabriel
I was okay with the once-a-year placement tests (and SATs) where the spots were circular, but the ones with dash-shaped rectangles always gave me trouble.
That's a technical issue.
But so far we've already seen that all standardized tests do is compel school districts to value test scores over the welfare of the students. We've seen all sorts of shenanigans to expel students because their test scores affect negatively the school average, which in turn affects funding.
This is the end result of No Child Left Behind: children left out.
So I have no qualms about kids cheating like fire to pass those tests, since the alternative is them getting kicked out of school for costing the district money. Frankly, those kids should be bribing / blackmailing / extorting maybe even murdering their way through school. Since the administrators seem so eager to ruin the lives of young people, it's only appropriate that reprisal is in order.
Maybe when this level of desperation surfaces, it will drive us to change our school policies to actually prepare children for adult life.
It's not parents wanting to prevent birth-defects or create a being that excels that is our greatest concern. It's a state that wants kids that can't think well, love to work and don't complain much.
Pro tip: High-performance human beings tend to be open-architecture and also require a high-performance childhood. If you aren't looking to devote a substantial amount of time actually raising the kid, he may grow up to be a high-performance disaster.
If you and your partner are working separate jobs and come home tired day after day, you might want to consider an economy package...say, not breeding at all.
I think of the last refuge of social misfits amd crime-on-crime or crime-on-superdiskish-business practices (a la the predation on the Spanish Silver Train, or oyster pirates selling fish outside the licensed cartels).
This is before we get to Robert Newton's captivating interpretation of Long John Silver in classic cinema.
Funny how media piracy falls into the same category, given that the predation is less on artists and more on the gatekeepers who are renowned for mistreating artists anyway.
Which is that if they provide certain kinds of games, they'll get enough of a following that they can rule their customers with an iron fist (in some cases permabanning accounts without explanation) and that following will stay loyal.
Kinda like Zynga.
It does make EA look like a total turd, but so far a golden turd.
How do people still believe that tradition or common practice justifies a terrible practice?
We also torture and throw wrongful convictions by the hundreds into inhumane prisons. Not that I'm saying that DRM on a computer game is of the same caliber of heinous crime as wrongfully imprisoning people into dungeons. But the notion of that's just the way it's done is an appeal to the continuation of madness.
In my head this keeps coming back to the Capone case. We couldn't peg him on anything so we engaged in a very creative interpretation of the law (Tax Evasion and then with some fuzzy logic to extend the statute of limitations so that Capone was still culpable).
It's okay because we know Capone was a dirtbag, right?
Except that it served as a precedent for practice that now extends to non-dirtbags. The state decided it could get away with creative interpretation and now it's abused all. the. fucking. time.
Back to the present, Dotcom's case is showing a corruption of justice. The DoJ's actions against Dotcom is (amongst a ton of other incidents) raising the validity of the US Courts to fairly adjudicate.
And that means that all our prisoners, much like the prisoners in North Korea, are not criminal prisoners but political prisoners. Right down to the psycho-killers and terrorists that we know did it.
That means that Mansion and Kaczynski may yet get their reprieve, on USA Bastille day.
That it would be if it was argued that it was done in error or thanks to a convoluted interpretation of the law.
Like when we decide that torture is legal and that mass surveillance is legal and denying human beings rights without due process is legal it weakens the notion that legal in the US has anything to do with what is right or good.
And then when a person advocate that the legality of such things is based on it being right, that would raise question as to that person's own sense of morality.