----- Original Message -----
From: Alex Constantine <alexx12@mediaone.net>
To: Lloyd <lloyd@a-albionic.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 8:56 PM
Subject: FW: Ted Kacyznski, brainwashed by OSS Psychiatrist Henry A. Murray
----------
From: cynthia ford <maruta@wco.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:24:43 -0700
To: alexx12@mediaone.net
Subject: Ted Kacyznski, brainwashed by OSS Psychiatrist Henry A. Murray
 >X-Sender: lsharman@mail.microage-tb.com
 >X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32)
 >Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 19:12:25 -0400
 >To: acaadc@aol.com
 >From: Lynne Moss-Sharman <lsharman@microage-tb.com>
 >Subject: Ted Kacyznski, brainwashed by OSS Psychiatrist Henry A. Murray
 >
 >see: OSS Psychiatrist  Henry A. Murray
 >"Multiform Assessments of Personality Development Among Gifted College Men,
 >1941-1965," by Henry A. Murray
 >Henry A. Murray's abstract of the study to which he subjected Theodore
 >Kaczynski and other Harvard students. Posted by the Henry A. Murray
 >Research Center of the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study.
 >
 >ATLANTIC MONTHLY
 >http://www.theatlantic.com/cgi-bin/o/issues/2000/06/chase.htm
 >
 >J U N E 2 0 0 0
 >Alston Chase is the author of Playing God in Yellowstone (1986) and In a
 >Dark Wood (1995). He is at work on a book about Theodore Kaczynski.
 ><Picture: Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber>
 >
 >In the fall of 1958 Theodore Kaczynski, a brilliant but vulnerable boy of
 >sixteen, entered Harvard College. There he encountered a prevailing
 >intellectual atmosphere of anti-technological despair. There, also, he was
 >deceived into subjecting himself to a series of purposely brutalizing
 >psychological experiments -- experiments that may have confirmed his
 >still-forming belief in the evil of science. Was the Unabomber born at
 >Harvard? A look inside the files
 >
 >by Alston Chase
 >
 >(The online version of this article appears in four parts. Click here to go
 >to part two, part three, or part four.)
 >
 >
 ><Picture: L>IKE many Harvard alumni, I sometimes wander the neighborhood
 >when I return to Cambridge, reminiscing about the old days and musing on
 >how different my life has been from what I hoped and expected then. On a
 >trip there last fall I found myself a few blocks north of Harvard Yard, on
 >Divinity Avenue. Near the end of this dead-end street sits the Peabody
 >Museum -- a giant Victorian structure attached to the Botanical Museum,
 >where my mother had taken me as a young boy, in 1943, to view the
 >spectacular exhibit of glass flowers. These left such a vivid impression
 >that a decade later my recollection of them inspired me, then a senior in
 >high school, to apply to Harvard.
 >
 >This time my return was prompted not by nostalgia but by curiosity. No. 7
 >Divinity Avenue is a modern multi-story academic building today, housing
 >the university's Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology. In 1959 a
 >comfortable old house stood on the site. Known as the Annex, it served as a
 >laboratory in which staff members of the Department of Social Relations
 >conducted research on human subjects. There, from the fall of 1959 through
 >the spring of 1962, Harvard psychologists, led by Henry A. Murray,
 >conducted a disturbing and what would now be seen as ethically indefensible
 >experiment on twenty-two undergraduates. To preserve the anonymity of these
 >student guinea pigs, experimenters referred to individuals by code name
 >only. One of these students, whom they dubbed "Lawful," was Theodore John
 >Kaczynski, who would one day be known as the Unabomber, and who would later
 >mail or deliver sixteen package bombs to scientists, academicians, and
 >others over seventeen years, killing three people and injuring
twenty-three.
 >
 ><Picture: I>HAD a special interest in Kaczynski. For many years he and I
 >had lived parallel lives to some degree. Both of us had attended public
 >high schools and had then gone on to Harvard, from which I graduated in
 >1957, he in 1962. At Harvard we took many of the same courses from the same
 >professors. We were both graduate students and assistant professors in the
 >1960s. I studied at Oxford and received a Ph.D. in philosophy from
 >Princeton before joining the faculty at Ohio State and later serving as
 >chairman of the Department of Philosophy at Macalester College, in
 >Minnesota. Kaczynski earned a Ph.D. in mathematics at the University of
 >Michigan in 1967 and then joined the Berkeley Department of Mathematics as
 >an instructor. In the early 1970s, at roughly the same time, we separately
 >fled civilization to the Montana wilderness.
 >
 >In 1971 Kaczynski moved to Great Falls, Montana; that summer he began
 >building a cabin near the town of Lincoln, eighty miles southwest of Great
 >Falls, on a lot he and his brother, David, had bought. In 1972 my wife and
 >I bought an old homestead fifty-five miles south of Great Falls. Three
 >years later we gave up our teaching jobs to live in Montana full-time. Our
 >place had neither telephone nor electricity; it was ten miles from the
 >nearest neighbor. In winter we were snowbound for months at a time.
 >
 >In our desire to leave civilization Kaczynski and I were not alone. Many
 >others sought a similar escape. What, I wondered, had driven Kaczynski into
 >the wilderness, and to murder? To what degree were his motives simply a
 >more extreme form of the alienation that prompted so many of us to seek
 >solace in the backwoods?
 >
 >Most of us may believe we already know Ted Kaczynski. According to the
 >conventional wisdom, Kaczynski, a brilliant former professor of mathematics
 >turned Montana hermit and mail bomber, is, simply, mentally ill. He is a
 >paranoid schizophrenic, and there is nothing more about him to interest us.
 >But the conventional wisdom is mistaken. I came to discover that Kaczynski
 >is neither the extreme loner he has been made out to be nor in any clinical
 >sense mentally ill. He is an intellectual and a convicted murderer, and to
 >understand the connections between these two facts we must revisit his time
 >at Harvard.
 >
 >I first heard of the Murray experiment from Kaczynski himself. We had begun
 >corresponding in July of 1998, a couple of months after a federal court in
 >Sacramento sentenced him to life without possibility of parole. Kaczynski,
 >I quickly discovered, was an indefatigable correspondent. Sometimes his
 >letters to me came so fast that it was difficult to answer one before the
 >next arrived. The letters were written with great humor, intelligence, and
 >care. And, I found, he was in his own way a charming correspondent. He has
 >apparently carried on a similarly voluminous correspondence with many
 >others, often developing close friendships with them through the mail.
 >
 >Kaczynski told me that the Henry A. Murray Research Center of the Radcliffe
 >Institute for Advanced Study, although it released some raw data about him
 >to his attorneys, had refused to share information about the Murray team's
 >analysis of that data. Kaczynski hinted darkly that the Murray Center
 >seemed to feel it had something to hide. One of his defense investigators,
 >he said, reported that the center had told participating psychologists not
 >to talk with his defense team.
 >
 >After this intriguing start Kaczynski told me little more about the Murray
 >experiment than what I could find in the published literature. Henry
 >Murray's widow, Nina, was friendly and cooperative, but could provide few
 >answers to my questions. Several of the research assistants I interviewed
 >couldn't, or wouldn't, talk much about the study. Nor could the Murray
 >Center be entirely forthcoming. After considering my application, its
 >research committee approved my request to view the records of this
 >experiment, the so-called data set, which referred to subjects by code
 >names only. But because Kaczynski's alias was by then known to some
 >journalists, I was not permitted to view his records.
 >
 >Through research at the Murray Center and in the Harvard archives I found
 >that, among its other purposes, Henry Murray's experiment was intended to
 >measure how people react under stress. Murray subjected his unwitting
 >students, including Kaczynski, to intensive interrogation -- what Murray
 >himself called "vehement, sweeping, and personally abusive" attacks,
 >assaulting his subjects' egos and most-cherished ideals and beliefs.
 >
 >My quest was specific -- to determine what effects, if any, the experiment
 >may have had on Kaczynski. This was a subset of a larger question: What
 >effects had Harvard had on Kaczynski? In 1998, as he faced trial for
 >murder, Kaczynski was examined by Sally Johnson, a forensic psychiatrist
 >with the U.S. Bureau of Prisons, at the order of a court. In her evaluation
 >Johnson wrote that Kaczynski "has intertwined his two belief systems, that
 >society is bad and he should rebel against it, and his intense anger at his
 >family for his perceived injustices." The Unabomber was created when these
 >two belief systems converged. And it was at Harvard, Johnson suggested,
 >that they first surfaced and met. She wrote,
 >
 >During his college years he had fantasies of living a primitive life and
 >fantasized himself as "an agitator, rousing mobs to frenzies of
 >revolutionary violence." He claims that during that time he started to
 >think about breaking away from normal society.
 >
 >
 >
 >It was at Harvard that Kaczynski first encountered the ideas about the
 >evils of society that would provide a justification for and a focus to an
 >anger he had felt since junior high school. It was at Harvard that he began
 >to develop these ideas into his anti-technology ideology of revolution. It
 >was at Harvard that Kaczynski began to have fantasies of revenge, began to
 >dream of escaping into wilderness. And it was at Harvard, as far as can be
 >determined, that he fixed on dualistic ideas of good and evil, and on a
 >mathematical cognitive style that led him to think he could find absolute
 >truth through the application of his own reason. Was the Unabomber -- "the
 >most intellectual serial killer the nation has ever produced," as one
 >criminologist has called him -- born at Harvard?
 >
 >The Manifesto
 >
 >
 ><Picture: T>HE story of Kaczynski's crimes began more than twenty-two years
 >ago, but the chain of consequences they triggered has yet to run its
 >course. Dubbed "the Unabomber" by the FBI because his early victims were
 >associated with universities or airlines, Kaczynski conducted an
 >increasingly lethal campaign of terrorism that began on May 26, 1978, when
 >his first bomb slightly injured a Northwestern University public-safety
 >officer, Terry Marker, and ended on April 24, 1995, when a bomb he had
 >mailed killed the president of the California Forestry Association, Gilbert
 >Murray. Yet until 1993 Kaczynski remained mute, and his intentions were
 >entirely unknown.
 >
 >By 1995 his explosives had taken a leap in sophistication; that year he
 >suddenly became loquacious, writing letters to newspapers, magazines,
 >targets, and a victim. Two years later The Washington Post, in conjunction
 >with The New York Times, published copies of the 35,000-word essay that
 >Kaczynski titled "Industrial Society and Its Future," and which the press
 >called "The Manifesto."
 >
 >Recognizing the manifesto as Kaczynski's writing, his brother, David,
 >turned Kaczynski in to the FBI, which arrested him at his Montana cabin on
 >April 3, 1996. Later that year Kaczynski was removed to California to stand
 >trial for, among other crimes, two Unabomber murders committed in that
 >state. On January 8, 1998, having failed to dissuade his attorneys from
 >their intention of presenting an insanity defense, and having failed to
 >persuade the presiding judge, Garland E. Burrell Jr., to allow him to
 >choose a new attorney, Kaczynski asked the court for permission to
 >represent himself. In response Burrell ordered Sally Johnson to examine
 >Kaczynski, to determine if he was competent to direct his own defense.
 >Johnson offered a "provisional" diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia, but
 >she concluded that Kaczynski was nevertheless competent to represent
 >himself. Burrell refused to allow it. Faced with the prospect of a
 >humiliating trial in which his attorneys would portray him as insane and
 >his philosophy as the ravings of a madman, Kaczynski capitulated: in
 >exchange for the government's agreement not to seek the death penalty, he
 >pleaded guilty to thirteen federal bombing offenses that killed three men
 >and seriously injured two others, and acknowledged responsibility for
 >sixteen bombings from 1978 to 1995. On May 4, 1998, he was sentenced to
 >life in prison without possibility of parole.
 >
 >Driving these events from first bomb to plea bargain was Kaczynski's strong
 >desire to have his ideas -- as described in the manifesto -- taken
seriously.
 >
 >"The Industrial Revolution and its consequences," Kaczynski's manifesto
 >begins, "have been a disaster for the human race." They have led, it
 >contends, to the growth of a technological system dependent on a social,
 >economic, and political order that suppresses individual freedom and
 >destroys nature. "The system does not and cannot exist to satisfy human
 >needs. Instead, it is human behavior that has to be modified to fit the
 >needs of the system."
 >
 >By forcing people to conform to machines rather than vice versa, the
 >manifesto states, technology creates a sick society hostile to human
 >potential. Because technology demands constant change, it destroys local,
 >human-scale communities. Because it requires a high degree of social and
 >economic organization, it encourages the growth of crowded and unlivable
 >cities and of mega-states indifferent to the needs of citizens.
 >
 >This evolution toward a civilization increasingly dominated by technology
 >and the power structure serving technology, the manifesto argues, cannot be
 >reversed on its own, because "technology is a more powerful social force
 >than the aspiration for freedom," and because "while technological progress
 >AS A WHOLE continually narrows our sphere of freedom, each new technical
 >advance CONSIDERED BY ITSELF appears to be desirable." Hence science and
 >technology constitute "a mass power movement, and many scientists gratify
 >their need for power through identification with this mass movement."
 >Therefore "the technophiles are taking us all on an utterly reckless ride
 >into the unknown."
 >
 >Because human beings must conform to the machine,
 >
 >our society tends to regard as a "sickness" any mode of thought or behavior
 >that is inconvenient for the system, and this is plausible because when an
 >individual doesn't fit into the system it causes pain to the individual as
 >well as problems for the system. Thus the manipulation of an individual to
 >adjust him to the system is seen as a "cure" for a "sickness" and therefore
 >as good.
 >
 >
 >
 >This requirement, the manifesto continues, has given rise to a social
 >infrastructure dedicated to modifying behavior. This infrastructure
 >includes an array of government agencies with ever-expanding police powers,
 >an out-of-control regulatory system that encourages the limitless
 >multiplication of laws, an education establishment that stresses
 >conformism, ubiquitous television networks whose fare is essentially an
 >electronic form of Valium, and a medical and psychological establishment
 >that promotes the indiscriminate use of mind-altering drugs.
 >
 >Since the system threatens humanity's survival and cannot be reformed,
 >Kaczynski argued, it must be destroyed. Indeed, the system will probably
 >collapse on its own, when the weight of human suffering it creates becomes
 >unbearable. But the longer it persists, the more devastating will be the
 >ultimate collapse. Hence "revolutionaries" like the Unabomber "by hastening
 >the onset of the breakdown will be reducing the extent of the disaster."
 >
 >"We have no illusions about the feasibility of creating a new, ideal form
 >of society," Kaczynski wrote. "Our goal is only to destroy the existing
 >form of society." But this movement does have a further goal. It is to
 >protect "wild nature," which is the opposite of technology. Admittedly,
 >"eliminating industrial society" may have some "negative consequences," but
 >"well, you can't eat your cake and have it too."
 >
 ><Picture: T>HE Unabomber's manifesto was greeted in 1995 by many thoughtful
 >people as a work of genius, or at least profundity, and as quite sane. In
 >The New York Times the environmental writer Kirkpatrick Sale wrote that the
 >Unabomber "is a rational man and his principal beliefs are, if hardly
 >mainstream, entirely reasonable." In The Nation Sale declared that the
 >manifesto's first sentence "is absolutely crucial for the American public
 >to understand and ought to be on the forefront of the nation's political
 >agenda." The science writer Robert Wright observed in Time magazine,
 >"There's a little bit of the unabomber in most of us." An essay in The New
 >Yorker by Cynthia Ozick described the Unabomber as America's "own
 >Raskolnikov -- the appealing, appalling, and disturbingly visionary
 >murderer of 'Crime and Punishment,' Dostoyevsky's masterwork of 1866."
 >Ozick called the Unabomber a "philosophical criminal of exceptional
 >intelligence and humanitarian purpose, who is driven to commit murder out
 >of an uncompromising idealism." Sites devoted to the Unabomber multiplied
 >on the Internet -- the Church of Euthanasia Freedom Club; Unapack, the
 >Unabomber Political Action Committee; alt.fan.unabomber; Chuck's Unabomb
 >Page; redacted.com; MetroActive; and Steve Hau's Rest Stop. The University
 >of Colorado hosted a panel titled "The Unabomber Had a Point."
 >
 >By 1997, however, when Kaczynski's trial opened, the view had shifted.
 >Although psychiatrists for the prosecution continued to cite the manifesto
 >as proof of Kaczynski's sanity, experts for the defense and many in the
 >media now viewed it as a symptom and a product of severe mental illness.
 >The document, they argued, revealed a paranoid mind. During the trial the
 >press frequently quoted legal experts who attested to Kaczynski's insanity.
 >Gerald Lefcourt, then the president of the National Association of Criminal
 >Defense Lawyers, said the defendant was "obviously disturbed." Donald
 >Heller, a former federal prosecutor, said, "This guy is not playing with a
 >full deck." The writer Maggie Scarf suggested in The New Republic that
 >Kaczynski suffered from "Narcissistic Personality Disorder."
 >
 >Michael Mello, a professor at Vermont Law School, is the author of The
 >United States of America vs. Theodore John Kaczynski. He and William
 >Finnegan, a writer for The New Yorker, have suggested that Kaczynski's
 >brother, David, his mother, Wanda, and their lawyer, Tony Bisceglie, along
 >with Kaczynski's defense attorneys, persuaded many in the media to portray
 >Kaczynski as a paranoid schizophrenic. To a degree this is true. Anxious to
 >save Kaczynski from execution, David and Wanda gave a succession of
 >interviews from 1996 onward to The Washington Post, The New York Times, and
 >Sixty Minutes, among other outlets, in which they sought to portray
 >Kaczynski as mentally disturbed and pathologically antisocial since
 >childhood. Meanwhile -- against his wishes and without his knowledge,
 >Kaczynski insists -- his attorneys launched a mental-health defense for
 >their client.
 >
 >One psychology expert for the defense, Karen Bronk Froming, concluded that
 >Kaczynski exhibited a "predisposition to schizophrenia." Another, David
 >Vernon Foster, saw "a clear and consistent picture of schizophrenia,
 >paranoid type." Still another, Xavier F. Amador, described Kaczynski as
 >"typical of the hundreds of patients with schizophrenia." How did the
 >experts reach their conclusions? Although objective tests alone suggested
 >to Froming only that Kaczynski's answers were "consistent with"
 >schizophrenia, she told Finnegan it was Kaczynski's writings -- in
 >particular his "anti-technology" views -- that cemented this conclusion for
 >her. Foster, who met with Kaczynski a few times but never formally examined
 >him, cited his "delusional themes" as evidence of sickness. Amador, who
 >never met Kaczynski at all, based his judgment on the "delusional beliefs"
 >he detected in Kaczynski's writing. And Sally Johnson's provisional
 >diagnosis -- that Kaczynski suffered from "Paranoid Type" schizophrenia --
 >was largely based on her conviction that he harbored "delusional beliefs"
 >about the threats posed by technology. The experts also found evidence of
 >Kaczynski's insanity in his refusal to accept their diagnoses or to help
 >them reach those diagnoses.
 >
 >Most claims of mental illness rested on the diagnoses of experts whose
 >judgments, therefore, derived largely from their opinions of Kaczynski's
 >philosophy and his personal habits -- he was a recluse, a wild man in
 >appearance, a slob of a housekeeper, a celibate -- and from his refusal to
 >admit he was ill. Thus Froming cited Kaczynski's "unawareness of his
 >disease" as an indication of illness. Foster complained of the defendant's
 >"symptom-based failure to cooperate fully with psychiatric evaluation."
 >Amador said that the defendant suffered "from severe deficits in awareness
 >of illness."
 >
 >But Kaczynski was no more unkempt than many other people on our streets.
 >His cabin was no messier than the offices of many college professors. The
 >Montana wilds are filled with escapists like Kaczynski (and me). Celibacy
 >and misanthropy are not diseases. Nor was Kaczynski really so much of a
 >recluse. Any reporter could quickly discover, as I did through interviews
 >with scores of people who have known Kaczynski (classmates, teachers,
 >neighbors), that he was not the extreme loner he has been made out to be.
 >And, surely, a refusal to admit to being insane or to cooperate with people
 >who are paid to pronounce one insane cannot be taken seriously as proof of
 >insanity.
 >
 >Why were the media and the public so ready to dismiss Kaczynski as crazy?
 >Kaczynski kept voluminous journals, and in one entry, apparently from
 >before the bombing started, he anticipated this question.
 >
 >I intend to start killing people. If I am successful at this, it is
 >possible that, when I am caught (not alive, I fervently hope!) there will
 >be some speculation in the news media as to my motives for killing.... If
 >some speculation occurs, they are bound to make me out to be a sickie, and
 >to ascribe to me motives of a sordid or "sick" type. Of course, the term
 >"sick" in such a context represents a value judgment.... the news media may
 >have something to say about me when I am killed or caught. And they are
 >bound to try to analyse my psychology and depict me as "sick." This
 >powerful bias should be borne [in mind] in reading any attempts to analyse
 >my psychology.
 >
 >
 >
 >Michael Mello suggests that the public wished to see Kaczynski as insane
 >because his ideas are too extreme for us to contemplate without discomfort.
 >He challenges our most cherished beliefs. Mello writes,
 >
 >The manifesto challenges the basic assumptions of virtually every interest
 >group that was involved with the case: the lawyers, the mental health
 >experts, the press and politics -- both left and right.... Kaczynski's
 >defense team convinced the media and the public that Kaczynski was crazy,
 >even in the absence of credible evidence ... [because] we needed to believe
 >it.... They decided that the Unabomber was mentally ill, and his ideas were
 >mad. Then they forgot about the man and his ideas, and created a curative
 >tale.
 >
 >
 >
 >Mello is only half right. It is true that many believed Kaczynski was
 >insane because they needed to believe it. But the truly disturbing aspect
 >of Kaczynski and his ideas is not that they are so foreign but that they
 >are so familiar. The manifesto is the work of neither a genius nor a
 >maniac. Except for its call to violence, the ideas it expresses are
 >perfectly ordinary and unoriginal, shared by many Americans. Its pessimism
 >over the direction of civilization and its rejection of the modern world
 >are shared especially with the country's most highly educated. The
 >manifesto is, in other words, an academic -- and popular -- cliché. And if
 >concepts that many of us unreflectively accept can lead a person to commit
 >serial murder, what does that say about us? We need to see Kaczynski as
 >exceptional -- madman or genius -- because the alternative is so much more
 >frightening.
 >
 >"Exceedingly Stable"
 >
 >
 ><Picture: N>O. 8 Prescott Street in Cambridge is a well-preserved
 >three-story Victorian frame house, standing just outside Harvard Yard.
 >Today it houses Harvard's expository-writing program. But in September of
 >1958, when Ted Kaczynski, just sixteen, arrived at Harvard, 8 Prescott
 >Street was a more unusual place, a sort of incubator.
 >
 >Earlier that year F. Skiddy von Stade Jr., Harvard's dean of freshmen, had
 >decided to use the house as living accommodations for the brightest,
 >youngest freshmen. Von Stade's well-intentioned idea was to provide these
 >boys with a nurturing, intimate environment, so that they wouldn't feel
 >lost, as they might in the larger, less personal dorms. But in so doing he
 >isolated the overly studious and less-mature boys from their classmates. He
 >inadvertently created a ghetto for grinds, making social adjustment for
 >them more, rather than less, difficult.
 >
 >"I lived at Prescott Street that year too," Michael Stucki told me
 >recently. "And like Kaczynski, I was majoring in mathematics. Yet I swear I
 >never ever even saw the guy." Stucki, who recently retired after a career
 >in computers, lived alone on the top floor, far from Kaczynski's
 >ground-floor room. In the unsocial society of 8 Prescott, that was a big
 >distance. "It was not unusual to spend all one's time in one's room and
 >then rush out the door to library or class," Stucki said.
 >
 >Francis Murphy, the Prescott Street proctor, was a graduate student who had
 >studied for the Catholic priesthood, and to Kaczynski it seemed the house
 >was intended to be run more like a monastery than a dorm. Whereas other
 >freshmen lived in suites with one or two roommates, six of the sixteen
 >students of Prescott Street, including Kaczynski, lived in single rooms.
 >All but seven intended to major in a mathematical science. All but three
 >came from high schools outside New England, and therefore knew few people
 >in Massachusetts. They were, in Murphy's words, "a serious, quiet bunch."
 >
 >Much has been made of Kaczynski's being a "loner" and of his having been
 >further isolated by Harvard's famed snobbism. Snobbism was indeed pervasive
 >at Harvard back then. A single false sartorial step could brand one an
 >outcast. And Kaczynski looked shabby. He owned just two pairs of slacks and
 >only a few shirts. Although he washed these each week in the coin-operated
 >machine in the basement of the house next door to 8 Prescott, they became
 >increasingly ragtag.
 >
 >But it is a mistake to exaggerate Kaczynski's isolation. Most public high
 >schoolers at Harvard in those days, including Kaczynski, viewed the tweedy
 >in-crowd as so many buttoned-down buffoons who did not realize how
 >ridiculous they looked. And the evidence is that Kaczynski was neither
 >exceptionally a loner nor, at least in his early years at Harvard,
 >alienated from the school or his peers.
 >
 >Harvard was a "tremendous thing for me," Kaczynski wrote in an unpublished
 >autobiography that he completed in 1998 and showed to me. "I got something
 >that I had been needing all along without knowing it, namely, hard work
 >requiring self-discipline and strenuous exercise of my abilities. I threw
 >myself into this.... I thrived on it.... Feeling the strength of my own
 >will, I became enthusiastic about will power."
 >
 >Freshmen were required to participate in sports, so Kaczynski took up
 >swimming and then wrestling. He played the trombone, as he had in high
 >school, even joining the Harvard band (which he quit almost as soon as he
 >learned that he would have to attend drill sessions). He played pickup
 >basketball. He made a few friends. One of his housemates, Gerald Burns,
 >remembers sitting with Kaczynski in an all-night cafeteria, arguing about
 >the philosophy of Kant. After Kaczynski's arrest Burns wrote to the
 >anarchist journal Fifth Estate that Kaczynski "was as normal as I am now:
 >it was [just] harder on him because he was much younger than his
 >classmates." And indeed, most reports of his teachers, his academic
 >adviser, his housemaster, and the health-services staff suggest that
 >Kaczynski was in his first year at Harvard entirely balanced, although
 >tending to be a loner. The health-services doctor who interviewed Kaczynski
 >as part of the medical examination Harvard required for all freshmen
 >observed,
 >
 >Good impression created. Attractive, mature for age, relaxed.... Talks
 >easily, fluently and pleasantly.... likes people and gets on well with
 >them. May have many acquaintances but makes his friends carefully. Prefers
 >to be by himself part of the time at least. May be slightly shy....
 >Essentially a practical and realistic planner and an efficient worker....
 >Exceedingly stable, well integrated and feels secure within himself.
 >Usually very adaptable. May have many achievements and satisfactions.
 >
 >
 >
 >The doctor further described Kaczynski thus: "Pleasant young man who is
 >below usual college entrance age. Apparently a good mathematician but seems
 >to be gifted in this direction only. Plans not crystallized yet but this is
 >to be expected at his age. Is slightly shy and retiring but not to any
 >abnormal extent. Should be [a] steady worker."
 >
 >The Roots of the Unabomber
 >
 >
 ><Picture: I>N 1952, when Kaczynski was ten, his parents moved from Chicago
 >to the suburban community of Evergreen Park -- in order, they later
 >explained to Ted, to provide him with a better class of friends. The
 >community into which the Kaczynskis moved would soon be in turmoil.
 >Evergreen Park was a mixed neighborhood of Irish, Italians, Czechs, and
 >Poles who now felt themselves under siege by yet another group of new
 >arrivals.
 >
 >On May 17, 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. Board of
 >Education of Topeka that segregated schooling was unconstitutional. To many
 >people in Evergreen Park this was tantamount to a declaration of war. Even
 >before the Court's decision they had feared what they saw as black
 >encroachment. African-American communities stood just next door, and black
 >families came to town to shop and eat at Evergreen Park restaurants. Black
 >teenagers hung around Evergreen Plaza.
 >
 >This environment tended to isolate the Kaczynskis, who by several accounts
 >were liberal on race matters. Aggravating their isolation was Evergreen
 >Park's fragmented school system. Until 1955 the town had no public high
 >school building, and students were bused to high schools in surrounding
 >communities. Evergreen Park High School was not completed until 1955, and
 >Ted Kaczynski, who became a member of the first class that spent all four
 >years there, found himself in a school without cohesion or community, where
 >few of the students knew one another. As Spencer Gilmore, a former science
 >teacher, lamented, there was "no commonality in the student body." Howard
 >Finkle, who was then a social-studies teacher, describes Evergreen Park in
 >those years as a school for strangers. Soon the school was riven by
cliques.
 >
 >Despite this fractured environment, school administrators sought to push
 >the students hard academically. "The fact to keep in mind about Evergreen
 >Park," Kaczynski's algebra teacher, Paul Jenkins, told me, "is that Gene
 >Howard [the principal of Evergreen Park High School at the time] enjoyed a
 >big budget. He had combed the country for the best instructors he could
 >find -- folks who would be teaching junior college in most places. Yet most
 >of the kids were incredibly naive. Some had never even been to downtown
 >Chicago. The faculty was presenting them with ideas they'd never
 >encountered before. Some hated the experience; others loved it. And it blew
 >the minds of some, including perhaps Ted." The students, according to
 >Finkle, were asked to read books ordinarily used by college undergraduates.
 >The intellectually ambitious, like Kaczynski, adapted readily to these
 >demands, but in a school where the most popular boys carried cigarette
 >packs rolled up in the sleeves of their T-shirts, excelling at academics
 >meant social exile.
 >
 >What pressures did Kaczynski face among his family? Ted Kaczynski insists
 >that the Kaczynski home was an unhappy one and that his social isolation
 >came about because his parents pushed him too hard academically. David and
 >Wanda say that theirs was a happy and normal home but that Ted had shown
 >signs of extreme alienation since childhood. When family members squabble,
 >it is almost impossible for anyone -- least of all an outsider -- to know
 >who is right. And the Kaczynskis are squabblers.
 >
 >The letters and other materials Kaczynski sent me in the course of our
 >correspondence -- including his 1998 autobiography, containing quotations
 >from doctors, teachers, and college advisers -- naturally support his
 >version. Unfortunately, however, I am limited in my ability to use these,
 >because Kaczynski has continually changed his mind about the terms and
 >conditions for the use of his autobiography and other documents.
 >Nevertheless, most of the people I interviewed tended to support most of
 >his claims. I offer my own interpretation of his family relations, which is
 >supported by interviews and infused with knowledge of documents that
 >Kaczynski sent to me.
 >
 >Kaczynski's father, Theodore R. "Turk" Kaczynski, was a self-educated
 >freethinker living in a conventionally Catholic working-class community. In
 >his autobiography Kaczynski claims, and a close friend of Turk's confirms,
 >that Wanda tended to be fearful that their family would be perceived as
 >different. Although nonconformist, the Kaczynskis wanted to be perceived as
 >conforming. Thus, Kaczynski records, although the Kaczynskis were atheists,
 >his parents instructed him to tell people they were Unitarians. The tension
 >created by the family's efforts to look good to the neighbors increased
 >significantly when, in the fifth grade, Kaczynski scored 167 on an IQ test.
 >He skipped the sixth grade, leaving his friends behind to enter a new class
 >as the smallest kid in the room.
 >
 >From then on, according to Kaczynski and also according to others who knew
 >the family, his parents valued his intellect as a trophy that gave the
 >Kaczynskis special status. They began to push him to study, lecturing him
 >if his report card showed any grade below an A. Meanwhile, Turk seemed --
 >to Kaczynski, at least -- to become increasingly cold, critical, and
distant.
 >
 >When Kaczynski was a sophomore, the Evergreen Park High School
 >administration recommended that he skip his junior year. His band teacher
 >and friend, James Oberto, remembers pleading with Kaczynski's father not to
 >allow it. But Turk wouldn't listen. "Ted's success meant too much to him,"
 >Oberto says.
 >
 >Two years younger than his classmates, and still small for his age,
 >Kaczynski became even more of an outcast in school. There was "a gradual
 >increasing amount of hostility I had to face from the other kids," Sally
 >Johnson reports Kaczynski as admitting. "By the time I left high school, I
 >was definitely regarded as a freak by a large segment of the student body."
 >
 >Apparently caught between acrimony at home and rejection at school,
 >Kaczynski countered with activity. He joined the chess, biology, German,
 >and mathematics clubs. He collected coins. He read ravenously and widely,
 >excelling in every field from drama and history to biology and mathematics.
 >According to an account in The Washington Post, he explored the music of
 >Bach, Vivaldi, and Gabrieli, studied music theory, and wrote musical
 >compositions for a family trio -- David on the trumpet, Turk at the piano,
 >and himself on the trombone. He played duets with Oberto.
 >
 >These achievements made Kaczynski a favorite of his teachers. Virtually all
 >those with whom I talked who knew him well in those years saw him as
 >studious and a member of the lowest-ranking high school clique -- the
 >so-called briefcase boys -- but otherwise entirely normal. His physics
 >teacher, Robert Rippey, described him to me as "honest, ethical, and
 >sociable." His American-government teacher, Philip Pemberton, said he had
 >many friends and indeed seemed to be their "ringleader." Paul Jenkins used
 >Kaczynski as a kind of teaching assistant, to help students who were having
 >trouble in math. School reports regularly gave him high marks for neatness,
 >"respect for others," "courtesy," "respect for law and order," and
 >"self-discipline. "No one was more lavish in praise of Kaczynski than Lois
 >Skillen, his high school counselor. "Of all the youngsters I have worked
 >with at the college level," she wrote to Harvard,
 >
 >I believe Ted has one of the greatest contributions to make to society. He
 >is reflective, sensitive, and deeply conscious of his responsibilities to
 >society.... His only drawback is a tendency to be rather quiet in his
 >original meetings with people, but most adults on our staff, and many
 >people in the community who are mature find him easy to talk to, and very
 >challenging intellectually. He has a number of friends among high school
 >students, and seems to influence them to think more seriously.
 >
 >
 >
 >Kaczynski was accepted by Harvard in the spring of 1958; he was not yet
 >sixteen years old. One friend remembers urging Kaczynski's father not to
 >let the boy go, arguing, "He's too young, too immature, and Harvard too
 >impersonal." But again Turk wouldn't listen. "Ted's going to Harvard was an
 >ego trip for him," the friend recalls.
 >
 >General Education and the Culture of Despair
 >
 >
 ><Picture: A>LL Harvard freshmen in the 1950s, including Kaczynski and me,
 >were immersed in what the college described as "general education" and
 >students called Gen Ed. This program of studies, which had been fully
 >implemented by 1950, was part of a nationwide curricular reform that sought
 >to inculcate a sense of "shared values" among undergraduates through
 >instruction in the Judeo-Christian tradition.
 >
 >Unlike the usual departmental offerings, which focused on methodological
 >issues within a discipline, Gen Ed courses were intended to be
 >interdisciplinary, with material arranged for students historically
 >(chronologically) rather than analytically. Required Gen Ed courses focused
 >on science, literature, philosophy, history, and Western institutions. The
 >undergraduate curriculum, therefore, was initially designed to be neatly
 >divided into two categories, one general and one specialized, one
 >emphasizing history and values, the other emphasizing the value-free
 >methodologies employed by scholars in the various academic fields. This
 >attempt at balance would give rise to a battle in the long war between
 >humanism and positivism.
 >
 >From the archives:
 >
 >"Wanted: American Radicals," by James Bryant Conant (May 1943)
 >"In this country we must invoke our radical ancestors and with their spirit
 >attack the problems of a stratified society, highly mechanized and forced
 >to continue along the road of mass production."
 >
 >"Education in the Western World," by James Bryant Conant (November 1957)
 >"I should like to approach the subject of education for the professions in
 >the mood of the comparative educationalist. I should like to examine in
 >particular the way the future members of the professions are recruited,
 >selected, and educated in certain European nations and the United States."
 >
 >The Gen Ed curriculum was born of a lofty impulse: to establish in higher
 >education -- as President Harry Truman's Commission on Higher Education
 >would later express it -- "a code of behavior based on ethical principles
 >consistent with democratic ideals." Harvard's president, James B. Conant,
 >in his charge to the committee that would design Gen Ed, wrote,
 >
 >Unless the educational process includes at each level of maturity some
 >continuing contact with those fields in which value judgments are of prime
 >importance, it must fall far short of the ideal. The student in high
 >school, in college and in graduate school must be concerned, in part at
 >least, with the words "right" and "wrong" in both the ethical and
 >mathematical sense.
 >
 >The committee's report, General Education in a Free Society (1945), was
 >known, for the color of its cover, as the Redbook. The solution that the
 >Redbook committee offered was a program of instruction that, in the words
 >of the education historian Frederick Rudolph, called for "a submersion in
 >tradition and heritage and some sense of common bond strong enough to bring
 >unbridled ego and ambition under control." The Redbook's program of reform
 >caught the imagination of educators across the country. By the mid-1950s
 >more than half the colleges in America were offering programs of general
 >education modeled along the same lines.
 >
 >Although at Harvard the name caught on, the philosophy behind it did not.
 >Gen Ed was doomed from the start.
 >
 >By 1950 the Harvard faculty was divided between those who, chastened by
 >their experience in World War II and especially by the bombings of
 >Hiroshima and Nagasaki, saw science and technology as a threat to Western
 >values and even human survival and those -- a majority -- who saw science
 >as a liberator from superstition and an avenue to progress. Both these
 >views found their way into the Gen Ed curriculum.
 >
 >The dominant faction had little sympathy for the Redbook's resolve to
 >inculcate Judeo-Christian ethics. Because of the majority's resistance,
 >many Redbook-committee recommendations were never fully implemented. And
 >those recommendations that were incorporated into the curriculum were
 >quickly subverted by many of the people expected to teach it. These
 >professors in fact emphasized the opposite of the lesson Conant intended.
 >Rather than inculcate traditional values, they sought to undermine them.
 >Soon "Thou shalt not utter a value judgment" became the mantra for Harvard
 >freshmen, in dorm bull sessions as well as in term papers. Positivism
 >triumphed.
 >
 >Superficially, the positivist message appeared to be an optimistic one,
 >concerning the perfectibility of science and the inevitability of progress.
 >It taught that reason was a liberating force and faith mere superstition;
 >the advance of science would eventually produce a complete understanding of
 >nature. But positivism also taught that all the accumulated nonscientific
 >knowledge of the past, including the great religions and philosophies, had
 >been at best merely an expression of "cultural mores" and at worst
 >nonsense; life had no purpose and morality no justification.
 >
 >Even as positivism preached progress, therefore, it subliminally carried --
 >quite in contradiction to the intent of Gen Ed's framers -- a more
 >disturbing implication: that absolute reason leads to absolute despair. G.
 >K. Chesterton wrote, "Imagination does not breed insanity. Exactly what
 >does breed insanity is reason. Poets do not go mad ... mathematicians go
 >mad." Hence Gen Ed delivered to those of us who were undergraduates during
 >this time a double whammy of pessimism. From the humanists we learned that
 >science threatens civilization. From the scientists we learned that science
 >cannot be stopped. Taken together, they implied that there was no hope. Gen
 >Ed had created at Harvard a culture of despair. This culture of despair was
 >not, of course, confined to Harvard -- it was part of a more generalized
 >phenomenon among intellectuals all over the Western world. But it existed
 >at Harvard in a particularly concentrated form, and Harvard was the place
 >where Kaczynski and I found ourselves.
 >
 >Although I cannot say exactly what Kaczynski read, he must have absorbed a
 >good measure of the Gen Ed readings that infused the intellectual and
 >emotional climate on campus. Gen Ed courses in social science and
 >philosophy quickly introduced us to the relativity of morals and the
 >irrationality of religion. To establish that ethical standards were merely
 >expressions of Western cultural mores, we were assigned to read works by
 >anthropologists such as Margaret Mead (Coming of Age in Samoa) and Ruth
 >Benedict (Patterns of Culture). In Humanities 5, or "Ideas of Man and the
 >World in Western Thought," we read Sigmund Freud's polemic against
 >religious faith, The Future of an Illusion, which dismisses the belief that
 >life has purpose as a mere expression of infantile desires and as
 >confirming that "man is a creature of weak intelligence who is governed by
 >his instinctual wishes."
 >
 >In expository writing we encountered Thorstein Veblen's prediction that "so
 >long as the machine process continues to hold its dominant place as a
 >disciplinary factor in modern culture, so long must the spiritual and
 >intellectual life of this cultural era maintain the character which the
 >machine process gives it." We read Norbert Wiener, who warned that unless
 >human nature changes, the "new industrial revolution ... [makes it]
 >practically certain that we shall have to face a decade or more of ruin and
 >despair."
 >
 >And Lewis Mumford told us,
 >
 >Western man has exhausted the dream of mechanical power which so long
 >dominated his imagination.... he can no longer let himself remain
 >spellbound in that dream: he must attach himself to more humane purposes
 >than those he has given to the machine. We can no longer live, with the
 >illusions of success, in a world given over to devitalized mechanisms,
 >desocialized organisms, and depersonalized societies: a world that had lost
 >its sense of the ultimate dignity of the person.
 >
 >
 >
 >In "German R" ("Intermediate German With Review of Fundamentals"), which
 >both Kaczynski and I took, we encountered a whole corpus of pessimistic
 >writers, from Friedrich Nietzsche ("God is dead," "Morality is the herd
 >instinct of the individual," "The thought of suicide is a great source of
 >comfort") to Oswald Spengler ("This machine-technics will end with the
 >Faustian civilization and one day will lie in fragments, forgotten -- our
 >railways and steamships as dead as the Roman roads and the Chinese wall,
 >our giant cities and skyscrapers in ruins like old Memphis and Babylon").
 >
 >In several courses we studied Joseph Conrad, who would later become one of
 >Kaczynski's favorite writers, and whose description of the villain in Heart
 >of Darkness could have been applied to Kaczynski himself: "All Europe
 >contributed to the making of Kurtz.... " He was "a gifted creature.... He
 >was a universal genius." Conrad's The Secret Agent, a satire about
 >bomb-wielding anarchists who declare war on science (and whose intentional
 >irony Kaczynski may have missed), presages the Unabomber manifesto.
 >"Science," one of the plotters suggests, "is the sacrosanct fetish."
 >
 >All the damned professors are radicals at heart. Let them know that their
 >great panjandrum has got to go, too.... The demonstration must be against
 >learning -- science.... The attack must have all the shocking senselessness
 >of gratuitous blasphemy.... I have always dreamed of a band of men absolute
 >in their resolve to discard all scruples in the choice of means, strong
 >enough to give themselves frankly the name of destroyers, and free from the
 >taint of that resigned pessimism which rots the world. No pity for anything
 >on earth, including themselves, and death enlisted for good and all in the
 >service of humanity -- that's what I would have liked to see.
 >
 >
 >
 ><Picture: W>HAT impact did this reading have on us? Speaking as a former
 >college professor, I can say that most curricula have absolutely no effect
 >on most students. But readings can have profound effects on some students,
 >especially the brightest, most conscientious, and least mature. Certainly
 >the intellectual climate generated by Gen Ed informed Kaczynski's
 >developing views. The Unabomber philosophy bears a striking resemblance to
 >many parts of Harvard's Gen Ed syllabus. Its anti-technology message and
 >its despairing depiction of the sinister forces that lie beneath the
 >surface of civilization, its emphasis on the alienation of the individual
 >and on the threat that science poses to human values -- all these were in
 >the readings. And these kinds of ideas did not affect Kaczynski alone --
 >they reached an entire generation, and beyond.
 >
 >Gen Ed had more than an intellectual impact. According to a study of
 >Harvard and Radcliffe undergraduates that included Kaczynski's class of
 >1962, conducted by William G. Perry Jr., the director of the university's
 >Bureau of Study Counsel, the undergraduate curriculum had a profound impact
 >on the emotions, the attitudes, and even the health of some students.
 >
 >According to Perry, intellectual development for Harvard and Radcliffe
 >undergraduates typically encompassed a progression from a simplistic,
 >"dualistic" view of reality to an increasingly relativistic and
 >"contingent" one. Entering freshmen tend to favor simple over complex
 >solutions and to divide the world into truth and falsehood, good and bad,
 >friend and foe. Yet in most of their college courses, especially in the
 >social sciences and the humanities, they are taught that truth is relative.
 >Most accept this, but a number cannot. They react against relativism by
 >clinging more fiercely to an absolute view of the world. To some of these
 >students, in Perry's words, "science and mathematics still seem to offer
 >hope."
 >
 >Nevertheless, Perry wrote, "regression into dualism" is not a happy
 >development, for it "calls for an enemy." Dualists in a relativistic
 >environment tend to see themselves as surrounded; they become increasingly
 >lonely and alienated. This attitude "requires an equally absolutistic
 >rejection of any 'establishment'" and "can call forth in its defense hate,
 >projection, and denial of all distinctions but one," Perry wrote. "The
 >tendency ... is toward paranoia."
 >
 >As is evident in his writings, Kaczynski rejected the complexity and
 >relativism he found in the humanities and the social sciences. He embraced
 >both the dualistic cognitive style of mathematics and Gen Ed's
 >anti-technology message. And perhaps most important, he absorbed the
 >message of positivism, which demanded value-neutral reasoning and preached
 >that (as Kaczynski would later express it in his journal) "there was no
 >logical justification for morality."
 >
 >After he graduated from Harvard, Kaczynski encountered a book by the French
 >philosopher Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society (1954). Its message
 >was that mankind no longer saw technology as merely a tool but now pursued
 >its advancement as an end in itself. Society served technology, not vice
 >versa. Individuals were valued only insofar as they served this end. Their
 >education and the structure of their institutions were shaped solely for
 >the purpose of technological progress.
 >
 >By the time he encountered Ellul, Kaczynski recalled in 1998, "I had
 >already developed at least 50% of the ideas of that book on my own, and ...
 >when I read the book for the first time, I was delighted, because I
 >thought, 'Here is someone who is saying what I have already been
thinking.'"
 >
 >The Murray Experiment
 >
 >
 ><Picture: P>ERHAPS no figure at Harvard at this time better embodied the
 >ongoing war between science and humanism than Henry A. "Harry" Murray, a
 >professor in Harvard's Department of Social Relations. A wealthy and
 >blue-blooded New Yorker, Murray was both a scientist and a humanist, and he
 >was one of Lewis Mumford's best friends. He feared for the future of
 >civilization in an age of nuclear weapons, and advocated implementing the
 >agenda of the World Federalist Association, which called for a single world
 >government. The atomic bomb, Murray wrote in a letter to Mumford, "is the
 >logical & predictable result of the course we have been madly pursuing for
 >a hundred years." The choice now facing humanity, he added, was "One World
 >or No World."
 >
 >Yet unlike Mumford, Murray maintained a deep faith in science. He saw it as
 >offering a solution by helping to transform the human personality. "The
 >kind of behavior that is required by the present threat," Murray wrote
 >Mumford, "involves transformations of personality such as never occurred
 >quickly in human history; one transformation being that of National Man
 >into World Man." Crucial to achieving this change was learning the secret
 >of successful relationships between people, communities, and nations. And
 >coming to understand these "unusually successful relations" was the object
 >of Murray's particular research: the interplay between two individuals,
 >which he called the "dyad."
 >
 >The concept of the dyad was, in a sense, Murray's attempt to build a bridge
 >between psychology and sociology. Rather than follow Freud and Jung by
 >identifying the individual as the fundamental atom in the psychological
 >universe, Murray chose the dyad -- the smallest social unit -- and in this
 >way sought to unite psychiatry, which studied the psyches of individuals,
 >and sociology, which studied social relations. This kind of research, he
 >apparently hoped, might (as he put it in a 1947 paper) promote "the
 >survival and further evaluation of Modern Man, "by encouraging the
 >emergence of the new "world man" and making world peace more likely.
 >
 >Murray's interest in the dyad, however, may have been more than merely
 >academic. The curiosity of this complex man appears to have been impelled
 >by two motives -- one idealistic and the other somewhat less so. He lent
 >his talents to national aims during World War II. Forrest Robinson, the
 >author of a 1992 biography of Murray, wrote that during this period he
 >"flourished as a leader in the global crusade of good against evil." He was
 >also an advocate of world government. Murray saw understanding the dyad, it
 >seems, as a practical tool in the service of the great crusade in both its
 >hot and cold phases. (He had long shown interest, for example, in the whole
 >subject of brainwashing.) During the war Murray served in the Office of
 >Strategic Services, the forerunner of the CIA, helping to develop
 >psychological screening tests for applicants and (according to Timothy
 >Leary) monitoring military experiments on brainwashing. In his book The
 >Search for the "Manchurian Candidate" (1979), John Marks reported that
 >General "Wild Bill" Donovan, the OSS director, "called in Harvard
 >psychology professor Henry 'Harry' Murray" to devise a system for testing
 >the suitability of applicants to the OSS. Murray and his colleagues "put
 >together an assessment system ... [that] tested a recruit's ability to
 >stand up under pressure, to be a leader, to hold liquor, to lie skillfully,
 >and to read a person's character by the nature of his clothing.... Murray's
 >system became a fixture in the OSS."
 >
 >One of the tests that Murray devised for the OSS was intended to determine
 >how well applicants withstood interrogations. As he and his colleagues
 >described it in their 1948 report "Selection of Personnel for Clandestine
 >Operations -- Assessment of Men,"
 >
 >The candidate immediately went downstairs to the basement room. A voice
 >from within commanded him to enter, and on complying he found himself
 >facing a spotlight strong enough to blind him for a moment. The room was
 >otherwise dark. Behind the spotlight sat a scarcely discernible board of
 >inquisitors.... The interrogator gruffly ordered the candidate to sit down.
 >When he did so, he discovered that the chair in which he sat was so
 >arranged that the full strength of the beam was focused directly on his
 >face....
 >
 >At first the questions were asked in a quiet, sympathetic, conciliatory
 >manner, to invite confidence.... After a few minutes, however, the examiner
 >worked up to a crescendo in a dramatic fashion.... When an inconsistency
 >appeared, he raised his voice and lashed out at the candidate, often with
 >sharp sarcasm. He might even roar, "You're a liar."
 >
 >
 >
 >Even anticipation of this test was enough to cause some applicants to fall
 >apart. The authors wrote that one person "insisted he could not go through
 >with the test." They continued, "A little later the director ... found the
 >candidate in his bedroom, sitting on the edge of his cot, sobbing."
 >
 >Before the war Murray had been the director of the Harvard Psychological
 >Clinic. After the war Murray returned to Harvard, where he continued to
 >refine techniques of personality assessment. In 1948 he sent a grant
 >application to the Rockefeller Foundation proposing "the development of a
 >system of procedures for testing the suitability of officer candidates for
 >the navy." By 1950 he had resumed studies on Harvard undergraduates that he
 >had begun, in rudimentary form, before the war, titled "Multiform
 >Assessments of Personality Development Among Gifted College Men." The
 >experiment in which Kaczynski participated was the last and most elaborate
 >in the series. In their postwar form these experiments focused on stressful
 >dyadic relations, designing confrontations akin to those mock
 >interrogations he had helped to orchestrate for the OSS.
 >
 >go to part one, part two, or part four.)
 >
 >
 ><Picture: P>LANNING for the last of Murray's "multiform assessments" was
 >well under way by the spring of 1959. The idea, according to Murray's
 >notes, was to "call for volunteers from a large undergraduate course."
 >
 >Get about 80 sophomores; administer a series of scales or questionnaires
 >dealing with various dimensions of personality; pick 25 subjects, some
 >extremely high, some extremely low and some in middle on each of these
 >scales; study these 25 subjects over a three year period by the multiform
 >method of assessment; come up with 700 rank orders, and using a computer,
 >obtain clusters of intercorrelations, factors, but final decisions are
 >reached after prolonged discussions and reassessments; enormous amount of
 >data which staff analyzes, interprets, formulates.
 >
 >
 >
 >Kaczynski told Mello that he was "pressured into participating" in the
 >Murray experiment. His hesitation turned out to be sensible. Researchers
 >gave the volunteers almost no information about the experiment in which
 >they would participate. Each was simply asked to answer yes to the
 >following question: "Would you be willing to contribute to the solution of
 >certain psychological problems (parts of an on-going program of research in
 >the development of personality), by serving as a subject in a series of
 >experiments or taking a number of tests (average about 2 hours a week)
 >through the academic year (at the current College rate per hour)?"
 >
 >In fact it would never be clear what the "certain psychological problems"
 >were. And the test that served as the centerpiece for this undertaking
 >appears remarkably similar to the old OSS stress test. Students would be
 >given the third degree. But whereas the OSS applicants must have known that
 >enduring unpleasant interrogations could be part of their job, these
 >students did not. The intent was to catch them by surprise, to deceive
 >them, and to brutalize them. As Murray described it,
 >
 >First, you are told you have a month in which to write a brief exposition
 >of your personal philosophy of life, an affirmation of the major guiding
 >principles in accord with which you live or hope to live.
 >
 >Second, when you return to the Annex with your finished composition, you
 >are informed that in a day or two you and a talented young lawyer will be
 >asked to debate the respective merits of your two philosophies.
 >
 >
 >
 >When the subject arrived for the debate, he was escorted to a "brilliantly
 >lighted room" and seated in front of a one-way mirror. A motion-picture
 >camera recorded his every move and facial expression through a hole in the
 >wall. Electrodes leading to machines that recorded his heart and
 >respiratory rates were attached to his body. Then the debate began. But the
 >students were tricked. Contrary to what Murray claimed in his article, they
 >had been led to believe that they would debate their philosophy of life
 >with another student like themselves. Instead they confronted what Forrest
 >Robinson describes as a "well-prepared 'stooge'" -- a talented young lawyer
 >indeed, but one who had been instructed to launch into an aggressive attack
 >on the subject, for the purpose of upsetting him as much as possible.
 >
 >Robinson has described what happened next.
 >
 >As instructed, the unwitting subject attempted to represent and to defend
 >his personal philosophy of life. Invariably, however, he was frustrated,
 >and finally brought to expressions of real anger, by the withering assault
 >of his older, more sophisticated opponent.... while fluctuations in the
 >subject's pulse and respiration were measured on a cardiotachometer.
 >
 >
 >
 >Not surprisingly, most participants found this highly unpleasant, even
 >traumatic, as the data set records. "We were led into the room with bright
 >lights, very bright," one of them, code-named Cringle, recalled afterward.
 >
 >I could see shadowy activities going on behind the one-way glass ... [Dr.
 >G] ... started fastening things on me. [I] had a sensation somewhat akin to
 >someone being strapped on the electric chair with these electrodes ... I
 >really started getting hit real hard ... Wham, wham, wham! And me getting
 >hotter and more irritated and my heart beat going up ... and sweating
 >terribly ... there I was under the lights and with movie camera and all
 >this experimentation equipment on me ... It was sort of an unpleasant
 >experience.
 >
 >
 >
 >"Right away," said another, code-named Trump, describing his experience
 >afterward, "I didn't like [the interrogator]."
 >
 >[Dr. G] ... came waltzing over and he put on those electrodes but in that
 >process, while he was doing that, kind of whistling, I was looking over the
 >room, and right away I didn't like the room. I didn't like the way the
 >glass was in front of me through which I couldn't see, but I was being
 >watched and right away that puts one in a kind of unnatural situation and I
 >noted the big white lights and again that heightens the unnatural effect.
 >There was something peculiar about the set-up too, it was supposed to look
 >homey or look natural, two chairs and a little table, but again that struck
 >me as unnatural before the big piece of glass and the lights. And then [Mr.
 >R] ... who was bubbling over, dancing around, started to talk to me about
 >he liked my suit.... the buzzer would ring or something like that, we were
 >supposed to begin.... he was being sarcastic or pretty much of a wise
 >guy.... And the first thing that entered my mind was to get up and ask him
 >outside immediately ... but that was out of the question, because the
 >electrodes and the movie and all that ... I kind of sat there and began to
 >fume and then he went on and he got my goat and I couldn't think of what to
 >say.... And then they came along and they took my electrodes off.
 >
 >
 >
 >And so it went. One subject, Hinge, thought he was "being attacked."
 >Another, Naisfield, complained, "The lights were very bright.... Then the
 >things were put on my legs and whatnot and on the arm, ... I didn't like
 >the feel of the sticky stuff that was on there being sort of
uncomfortable."
 >
 >Although the "stressful dyadic proceeding" served as the centerpiece of
 >Murray's experiment (it occurred during the second year of the three-year
 >study), it was merely one among scores of different tests the students took
 >in order to allow Murray and his associates to acquire, as Murray wrote,
 >"the most accurate, significant, and complete knowledge and understanding
 >of a single psychological event that is obtainable."
 >
 >Before the dyadic confrontation took place, Murray and his colleagues
 >interviewed the students in depth about their hopes and aspirations. During
 >this same period the subjects were required to write not only essays
 >explaining their philosophies of life but also autobiographies, in which
 >they were told to answer specific, intimate questions on a range of
 >subjects from thumb-sucking and toilet training to masturbation and erotic
 >fantasies. And they faced a battery of tests that included, among others,
 >the Thematic Apperception Test, a Rorschach test, the Minnesota Multiphasic
 >Personality Inventory, the California Psychological Inventory, a "fantasy
 >inventory," a psychological-types inventory, the Maudalay Personality
 >Inventory, an "inventory of self-description," a "temperament
 >questionnaire," a "time-metaphor test," a "basic disposition test," a
 >"range of experience inventory," a "philosophical outlook test," a
 >food-preference inventory, analyses of their literary tastes and moral
 >precepts, an "odor association test," a "word association test," an
 >argument-completion test, a Wyatt finger-painting test, a
 >projective-drawings test, and a "Rosenzweig picture frustration test." The
 >results were then analyzed by researchers, who plotted them in numerous
 >ways in an effort to develop a psychological portrait of each personality
 >in all its dimensions.
 >
 >Only after most of this data had been collected did researchers administer
 >the stressful dyadic confrontation. During the year following this session
 >each student was called back for several "recall" interviews and sometimes
 >was asked to comment on the movie of himself being reduced to impotent
 >anger by the interrogator. During these replays, Murray wrote, "you will
 >see yourself making numerous grimaces and gestures" and "uttering
 >incongruent, disjunctive, and unfinished sentences."
 >
 >During the last year of the experiment Murray made the students available
 >to his graduate-student assistants, to serve as guinea pigs for their own
 >research projects. By graduation, as Kenneth Keniston, one of these
 >researchers, summarized the process later, "each student had spent
 >approximately two hundred hours in the research, and had provided hundreds
 >of pages of information about himself, his beliefs, his past life, his
 >family, his college life and development, his fantasies, his hopes and
 >dreams."
 >
 >Why were the students willing to endure this ongoing stress and probing
 >into their private lives? Some who had assisted Murray in the experiment
 >confessed to me that they wondered about this themselves. But they -- and
 >we -- can only speculate that some of the students (including Kaczynski)
 >did it for the money, that some (again, probably including Kaczynski) had
 >doubts about their own psychic health and were seeking reassurance about
 >it, that some, suffering from Harvard's well-known anomie, were lonely and
 >needed someone to talk to, and that some simply had an interest in helping
 >to advance scientific knowledge. But in truth we do not know. Alden E.
 >Wessman, a former research associate of Murray's who has long been bothered
 >by the unethical dimension of this study, said to me recently, "Later, I
 >thought: 'We took and took and used them and what did we give them in
 >return?'"
 >
 >What was the purpose of the experiment? Keniston told me that he wasn't
 >sure what the goals were. "Murray was not the most systematic scientist,"
 >he explained. Murray himself gave curiously equivocal answers. At times he
 >suggested that his intent was merely to gather as much raw data as possible
 >about one interpersonal event, which could then be used in different ways
 >to help "develop a theory of dyadic systems." At other times he recalled
 >the idealistic goal of acquiring knowledge that would lead to improving
 >human personality development. At still other times his language seemed to
 >suggest a continued interest in stressful interrogations. For example,
 >Murray explained in his "Notes on Dyadic Research," dated March 16, 1959,
 >that an ongoing goal of the research, which focused heavily on "degree of
 >anxiety and disintegration," was to "design and evaluate instruments and
 >procedures for the prediction of how each subject will react in the course
 >of a stressful dyadic proceeding."
 >
 >Sometimes Murray suggested that his research might have no value at all.
 >"Cui bono?" he once asked. "As [the data] stand they are nothing but raw
 >data, meaningless as such; and the question is what meaning, what
 >intellectual news, can be extracted from them?" In another context he
 >asked, "Are the costs in man-hours incurred by our elaborate, multiple
 >procedures far greater than any possible gains in knowledge?"
 >
 >Such equivocation prompts one to ask, Could the experiment have had a
 >purpose that Murray was reluctant to divulge? Was the multiform-assessments
 >project intended, at least in part, to help the CIA determine how to test,
 >or break down, an individual's ability to withstand interrogation? The
 >writer Alexander Cockburn has asked whether the students might have been
 >given the hallucinogenic drug LSD without their knowledge, possibly at the
 >request of the CIA. By the late 1950s, according to some, Murray had become
 >quite interested in hallucinogenics, including LSD and psilocybin. And soon
 >after Murray's experiments on Kaczynski and his classmates were under way,
 >in 1960, Timothy Leary returned to Harvard and, with Murray's blessing,
 >began his experiments with psilocybin. In his autobiography, Flashbacks
 >(1983), Leary, who would dedicate the rest of his life to promoting
 >hallucinogenic drugs, described Murray as "the wizard of personality
 >assessment who, as OSS chief psychologist, had monitored military
 >experiments on brainwashing and sodium amytal interrogation. Murray
 >expressed great interest in our drug-research project and offered his
 >support."
 >
 >Forrest Robinson reports in his biography that Murray took psilocybin and
 >in 1961 delivered a talk on his experience to the International Congress of
 >Applied Psychology. That Leary had Murray's support was confirmed by Martin
 >A. Lee and Bruce Schlain in their book Acid Dreams: The Complete Social
 >History of LSD (1985).
 >
 >Leary returned to Harvard and established a psilocybin research project
 >with the approval of Dr. Harry Murray, chairman of the Department of Social
 >Relations. Dr. Murray, who ran the Personality Assessments section of the
 >OSS during World War II, took a keen interest in Leary's work. He
 >volunteered for a psilocybin session, becoming one of the first of many
 >faculty and graduate students to sample the mushroom pill under Leary's
 >guidance.
 >
 >
 >
 >Kaczynski thinks he was never given LSD. And after exhaustive research I
 >could find no evidence that LSD was ever used in Murray's research.
 >Nevertheless, whether the research had a defense connection of some sort
 >remains an open question. Although direct evidence of support from a
 >federal defense grant is so far lacking, circumstantial evidence exists:
 >the strong similarity between the OSS stress tests and the later
 >experiments, Murray's association with the OSS, his grant proposal to do
 >research for the Navy Department, and the lack of any clearly explained
 >purpose for the study. Obviously, the dyadic studies would have had
 >considerable utility for the defense establishment, either as a framework
 >for testing recruits or as continuing work on how to improve interrogation
 >techniques.
 >
 >A Turning Point
 >
 >
 ><Picture: W>HAT was the state of Kaczynski's mental health at the time of
 >the multiform-assessments project and immediately afterward? The evidence
 >suggests that he was entirely sane during those years. By the spring of
 >1998 Kaczynski had obtained from the Murray Center his answers (along with
 >those of other Murray-experiment participants) on the Thematic Apperception
 >Test, which Murray had given to Kaczynski during the first year of the
 >experiment. At Kaczynski's request, his lawyers sent these to a
 >psychological-testing expert: Bertram Karon, at Michigan State University.
 >Because participants were identified only by code names, Karon was able to
 >conduct a blind evaluation -- measuring the answers without knowing who had
 >given them. Karon found that on a scale of 0 to 10, with 0 a complete
 >absence of illness and 10 the highest degree of illness, "Lawful" scored 0
 >for "Schizotypy" and 2 for "Psychopathy." Kaczynski's undergraduate
 >experience and behavior had been unremarkable. The reports of his
 >housemaster, his adviser, and the university doctors attested to his
 >normalcy, as did the observations of classmates. There is no evidence of
 >immediate mental degradation in the project's aftermath. Emotional turmoil
 >is another matter. As Sally Johnson, the forensic psychiatrist, reported,
 >Kaczynski clearly began to experience emotional distress then, and began to
 >develop his anti-technology views.
 >
 >And there is one thing that comes through clearly in the essays, test
 >answers, and interviews of Murray's subjects at the outset of the
 >experiment: many of these young men already exhibited attitudes of anger,
 >nihilism, and alienation -- reflecting, perhaps, just how persuasively a
 >culture of despair had infused student attitudes and suggesting that some
 >might have been especially vulnerable to stress.
 >
 >Bulwer admitted that "right now I have sort of a nihilistic outlook on
 >life.... How do you justify studying if you regard yourself as an ant
 >crawling through a great huge anthill with millions of others?"
 >
 >Ives (speaking of living a conventional life) confessed,
 >
 >And for doing all this I will hate myself. I mourn the world in which I
 >live because for me there is no place unless I compromise. All I can do is
 >gather up the shattered remains of my hope and love and in the debris of
 >the world keep at least one small blaze of poetry burning.... I most feel
 >akin to the artists and the philosophers and have a hatred for the
 >scientists. The scientists I hate because they are pursuing goals which are
 >destined to remove man even further from himself.
 >
 >
 >
 >Naisfield averred, "I don't feel that there is any purpose in my being
 >alive ..."
 >
 >To describe his philosophy of life, Oscar (roughly) quoted Bertrand Russell
 >(whose writings were assigned in Gen Ed): "Only on the firm foundation of
 >unyielding despair, can the soul's habitation henceforth be safely built."
 >
 >Quartz announced that there were "no such things as objective values."
 >
 >Dorset wrote simply, "Society as I see it stinks."
 >
 >Sanwick, as one researcher put it, is "basically distrustful of the whole
 >enterprise of life." Researchers found analyzing him "almost impossible,"
 >because "his whole life is conceptualized within a bombastic framework of
 >philosophical concepts: being, life, death, transcendency, preservation,
 >liberation, repetition, chaos.... One feels ... a great tumult and chaos of
 >awarenesses, perceptions, and feelings."
 >
 >The analysts deemed one subject "a young man in a state of considerable
 >distress, depression, and confusion.... extremely alienated" and another
 >prone to "withdrawal, silence." And so on, and on.
 >
 >It is clear, also, that Murray's experiment deeply affected at least some
 >of its subjects. From interviews conducted after the project ended, it is
 >apparent that certain students had found the experience searing. Even
 >twenty-five years later some recalled the unpleasantness. In 1987 Cringle
 >remembered the "anger and embarrassment ... the glass partition ... the
 >electrodes and wires running up our sleeves."
 >
 >Likewise, twenty-five years later Drill still had "very vivid general
 >memories of the experience ... I remember someone putting electrodes and
 >blood pressure counter on my arm just before the filming.... [I] was
 >startled by [his interlocutor's] venom.... I remember responding with
 >unabating rage."
 >
 >What Hinge remembered most vividly twenty-five years later was being
 >"attacked" and hating "having all my movements and sounds recorded.... we
 >were led over to the chairs and strapped in and as the wires were attached
 >to us.... I began to get more involved in the situation and I began to
 >realize that ... there I was, actually was going to be in front of the
 >movie camera ... I was surprised by how strongly he was attacking me...."
 >
 >And twenty-five years later Locust wrote,
 >
 >I remember appearing one afternoon for a 'debate' and being hooked up to
 >electrodes and sat in a chair with bright lights and being told a movie was
 >being made.... I remember him attacking me, even insulting me, for my
 >values, or for opinions I had expressed in my written material, and I
 >remember feeling that I could not defend these ideas, that I had written
 >them not intended for them to be the subject of a debate ... I remember
 >being shocked by the severity of the attack, and I remember feeling
 >helpless to respond.... So what I seem to remember are feelings
 >(bewilderment, surprise, anger, chagrin) sensations (the bright lights used
 >for the filming, the discomfort of the arrangements) reactions (how could
 >they have done this to me; what is the point of this? They have deceived
 >me, telling me there was going to be a discussion, when in fact there was
 >an attack).
 >
 >
 >
 >And at his twenty-fifth college reunion Ives wrote to Murray,
 >
 >My memories of the encounter 25 years ago ...
 >The young lawyer was surprisingly hostile ...
 >He had wavey jet black hair ...
 >The subject was the nature of love.
 >I argued that love could only be for a specific person.
 >He argued that one could love all mankind.
 >We talked about Natasha from WAR & PEACE.
 >I did not enjoy the experience.
 >
 >
 >
 >We don't know what effect this experiment may have had on Kaczynski. As
 >noted, I did not have access to his records, and therefore cannot attest to
 >his degree of alienation then. Diana Baumrind, a psychologist at the
 >University of California at Berkeley, observes that deceitful
 >experimentation can be harmful if the subjects "have been emotionally
 >unstable prior to the experiment." Kaczynski must certainly have been among
 >the most vulnerable of Murray's experimental subjects -- a point that the
 >researchers seem to have missed. He was among the youngest and the poorest
 >of the group. He may have come from a dysfunctional home.
 >
 >Lois Skillen, Kaczynski's high school counselor, is among those who believe
 >that the Murray experiment could have been a turning point in Kaczynski's
 >life. Ralph Meister, one of Turk Kaczynski's oldest friends and a retired
 >psychologist who has known Ted Kaczynski since he was a small boy, also
 >raises this possibility. So does one of Murray's own research associates.
 >The TAT results certainly suggest that at the outset of the experiment
 >Kaczynski was mentally healthy, but by the experiment's end, judging from
 >Sally Johnson's comments, he was showing the first signs of emotional
 >distress.
 >
 >As Kaczynski's college life continued, outwardly he seemed to be adjusting
 >to Harvard. But inwardly he increasingly seethed. According to Sally
 >Johnson, he began worrying about his health. He began having terrible
 >nightmares. He started having fantasies about taking revenge against a
 >society that he increasingly viewed as an evil force obsessed with imposing
 >conformism through psychological controls.
 >
 >These thoughts upset Kaczynski all the more because they exposed his
 >ineffectuality. Johnson reported that he would become horribly angry with
 >himself because he could not express this fury openly. "I never attempted
 >to put any such fantasies into effect," she quoted from his writings,
 >"because I was too strongly conditioned ... against any defiance of
 >authority.... I could not have committed a crime of revenge even a
 >relatively minor crime because ... my fear of being caught and punished was
 >all out of proportion to the actual danger of being caught."
 >
 >Kaczynski felt that justice demanded that he take revenge on society. But
 >he lacked the personal resources at that time to do so. He was -- had
 >always been -- a good boy. Instead he would seek escape. He began to dream
 >about breaking away from society and living a primitive life. According to
 >Johnson, he "began to study information about wild edible plants" and to
 >spend time learning about the wilderness. And like many American
 >intellectuals before him, from Henry David Thoreau to Edward Abbey, he
 >began to form a plan to seek personal renewal in nature.
 >
 ><Picture: T>ODAY society would not tolerate the deceptions inherent in the
 >Murray experiments. The researchers seem to have failed at least two
 >requirements in the American Psychological Association's current code of
 >conduct: that they obtain "informed consent" from their subjects and that
 >they "never deceive research participants about significant aspects that
 >would affect their willingness to participate, such as physical risks,
 >discomfort, or unpleasant emotional experiences." But different standards
 >prevailed then, and what we now view as the abuse of human subjects was
 >common. Researchers around the country performed experiments on
 >undergraduates that put them in psychological peril.
 >
 >In an infamous experiment conducted in 1962 by the Yale professor Stanley
 >Milgram, subjects (forty men recruited through mail solicitation and a
 >newspaper ad) were led to believe that they were delivering
 >ever-more-powerful electric shocks to a stranger, on orders from the
 >researcher. Nearly two thirds of them continued to obey the orders even
 >when they were asked to administer the highest level of shock, labeled
 >"Danger: Severe Shock." Some participants broke down on learning of their
 >potential for cruelty. "I observed a mature and initially poised
 >businessman enter the laboratory smiling and confident," Milgram wrote,
 >concerning one of his study subjects. "Within 20 minutes he was reduced to
 >a twitching, stuttering wreck, who was rapidly approaching a point of
 >nervous collapse."
 >
 >A 1971 experiment by the Stanford professor Philip Zimbardo embodied the
 >pursuit of scientific truth at the expense of students' psychological
 >health. Zimbardo selected twenty-four students to play a game of guards and
 >prisoners. Nine were "arrested" and taken to a basement "prison," where
 >they were guarded by the others. In a very short time the guards began
 >abusing the prisoners. This sadism erupted so quickly that Zimbardo
 >discontinued the experiment after six days -- eight days earlier than
 >originally intended.
 >
 >The Murray experiment may not have been as intensely traumatic as these
 >other experiments. And its ethics were definitely acceptable in their day.
 >But the ethics of the day were wrong. And they framed Kaczynski's first
 >encounter with a reckless scientific value system that elevated the pursuit
 >of scientific truth above human rights.
 >
 >When, soon after, Kaczynski began to worry about the possibility of mind
 >control, he was not giving vent to paranoid delusions. In view of Murray's
 >experiment, he was not only rational but right. The university and the
 >psychiatric establishment had been willing accomplices in an experiment
 >that had treated human beings as unwitting guinea pigs, and had treated
 >them brutally. Here is a powerful logical foundation for Kaczynski's
 >latterly expressed conviction that academics, in particular scientists,
 >were thoroughly compromised servants of "the system," employed in the
 >development of techniques for the behavioral control of populations.
 >
 >The Unabomber
 >
 >
 ><Picture: I>T was the confluence of two streams of development that
 >transformed Ted Kaczynski into the Unabomber. One stream was personal, fed
 >by his anger toward his family and those who he felt had slighted or hurt
 >him, in high school and college. The other derived from his philosophical
 >critique of society and its institutions, and reflected the culture of
 >despair he encountered at Harvard and later. The Murray experiment,
 >containing both psychological and philosophical components, may well have
 >fed both streams.
 >
 >Gradually, while he was immersed in his Harvard readings and in the Murray
 >experiment, Kaczynski began to put together a theory to explain his
 >unhappiness and anger. Technology and science were destroying liberty and
 >nature. The system, of which Harvard was a part, served technology, which
 >in turn required conformism. By advertising, propaganda, and other
 >techniques of behavior modification, this system sought to transform men
 >into automatons, to serve the machine.
 >
 >Thus did Kaczynski's Harvard experiences shape his anger and legitimize his
 >wrath. By the time he graduated, all the elements that would ultimately
 >transform him into the Unabomber were in place -- the ideas out of which he
 >would construct a philosophy, the unhappiness, the feelings of complete
 >isolation. Soon after, so, too, would be his commitment to killing.
 >Embracing the value-neutral message of Harvard's positivism -- morality was
 >nonrational -- made him feel free to murder. Within four years of
 >graduating from Harvard he would be firmly fixed in his life's plan.
 >According to an autobiography he wrote that chronicled his life until the
 >age of twenty-seven, "I thought 'I will kill, but I will make at least some
 >effort to avoid detection, so that I can kill again.'"
 >
 >Both Kaczynski's philosophy and his decision to go into the wilderness were
 >set by the summer of 1966, after his fourth year as a graduate student at
 >the University of Michigan (where, incidentally, students had rated him an
 >above-average instructor). It was then, Sally Johnson wrote, that "he
 >decided that he would do what he always wanted to do, to go to Canada to
 >take off in the woods with a rifle and try to live off the country. 'If it
 >doesn't work and if I can get back to civilization before I starve then I
 >will come back here and kill someone I hate.'" This was also when he
 >decided to accept the teaching position at Berkeley -- not in order to
 >launch an academic career but to earn a grubstake sufficient to support him
 >in the wilderness.
 >
 >In 1971 Kaczynski wrote an essay containing most of the ideas that later
 >appeared in the manifesto. "In these pages," it began, "it is argued that
 >continued scientific and technical progress will inevitably result in the
 >extinction of individual liberty." It was imperative that this juggernaut
 >be stopped, Kaczynski went on. This could not be done by simply
 >"popularizing a certain libertarian philosophy" unless "that philosophy is
 >accompanied by a program of concrete action."
 >
 >At that time Kaczynski still had some hope of achieving his goals by
 >peaceful means -- by establishing "an organization dedicated to stopping
 >federal aid to scientific research." It would not be long before he decided
 >this was fruitless. The same year, Johnson wrote, he was "thinking
 >seriously about and planning to murder a scientist." Meanwhile, he began to
 >practice what radical environmentalists call "monkeywrenching" --
 >sabotaging or stealing equipment and setting traps and stringing wires to
 >harm intruders into his wilderness domain. Later in the 1970s he began
 >experimenting with explosives. In 1978 he launched his campaign of
 >terrorism with the bomb that injured Terry Marker.
 >
 >The Evils of Intelligence
 >
 >
 ><Picture: T>ODAY Ted Kaczynski is serving four life terms in a
 >maximum-security prison in Florence, Colorado. Out of sight, he is not out
 >of play. His manifesto continues to be read at colleges around the country.
 >Through letters, he maintains relations with many people he knew before his
 >arrest. And although most Americans are morally repulsed by the Unabomber's
 >terrorism, many accept his anti-technology views and silently tolerate
 >extremist actions on behalf of saving "wild nature."
 >
 >Kaczynski has attracted a large new following of admirers. Indeed, he has
 >become an inspiration and a sort of leader in exile for the burgeoning
 >"green anarchist" movement. In a letter to me Kaczynski made clear that he
 >keeps in contact with other anarchists, including John Zerzan, the
 >intellectual leader of a circle of anarchists in Eugene, Oregon, who was
 >among the few people to visit Kaczynski while he was in jail in Sacramento,
 >awaiting trial. According to The Boston Globe, Theresa Kintz, one of
 >Zerzan's fellow anarchists, was the first writer to whom Kaczynski granted
 >an interview after his arrest. Writing for the London-based Green
 >Anarchist, Kintz quoted Kaczynski as saying, "For those who realize the
 >need to do away with the techno-industrial system, if you work for its
 >collapse, in effect you are killing a lot of people."
 >
 >The Los Angeles Times has reported that last June, 200 of Zerzan's comrades
 >rioted in Eugene, smashing computers, breaking shop windows, throwing
 >bricks at cars, and injuring eight police officers. According to the
 >Seattle Times, followers of Zerzan's also arrived in force at last
 >December's "Battle of Seattle," at the World Trade Organization meeting,
 >where they smashed shop windows, flattened tires, and dumped garbage cans
 >on the street.
 >
 >Kaczynski continues to comment approvingly on the violent exploits of
 >environmental radicals. In a letter he wrote last year to the Denver
 >television reporter Rick Sallinger, he expressed his support for the Earth
 >Liberation Front's arsons at the Vail ski resort -- fires that destroyed
 >more than $12 million worth of property.
 >
 >"I fully approve of [the arson]," he wrote Sallinger, "and I congratulate
 >the people who carried it out." Kaczynski went on to commend an editorial
 >in the Earth First! Journal by Kintz, who wrote, "The Earth Liberation
 >Front's eco-sabotage of Vail constituted a political act of conscience
 >perfectly in keeping with the sincere expression of the biocentric paradigm
 >many Earth First!ers espouse."
 >
 >It is unlikely that Kaczynski will someday be a free man again, but it is
 >not impossible. Although he pleaded guilty in January of 1998 to the
 >Unabomber crimes, that outcome is currently under appeal. He claims that
 >his attorneys deceived him and acted against his wishes by preparing a
 >"mental defect" defense for him, and that by allowing this to happen, the
 >court violated his Sixth Amendment right to direct his own defense. The
 >Ninth Circuit Court has agreed to hear his appeal, and a new trial is a
 >possibility.
 >
 >Some, including me, believe that if Kaczynski does win a new trial, he will
 >argue that his killings were necessary in order to save the world from a
 >great evil -- namely, technology. Most legal experts believe that this
 >would be an unpersuasive and even suicidal defense strategy, leading
 >directly to a guilty verdict and a sentence of death. But apparently
 >Kaczynski would rather die a martyr for his ideas than live out his life in
 >prison. At any rate, his essential point is correct: the Unabomber is not
 >only a killer but a sane one. He is a terrorist, like Timothy McVeigh, the
 >Oklahoma City bomber, and Ramzi Ahmed Yousef, the World Trade Center
 >bomber. And like them, he is evil. But what kind of evil?
 >
 ><Picture: T>HE real story of Ted Kaczynski is one of the nature of modern
 >evil -- evil that results from the corrosive powers of intellect itself,
 >and its arrogant tendency to put ideas above common humanity. It stems from
 >our capacity to conceive theories or philosophies that promote violence or
 >murder in order to avert supposed injustices or catastrophes, to acquiesce
 >in historical necessity, or to find the final solution to the world's
 >problems -- and by this process of abstraction to dehumanize our enemies.
 >We become like Raskolnikov, in Crime and Punishment, who declares, "I did
 >not kill a human being, but a principle!"
 >
 >Guided by theories, philosophies, and ideologies, the worst mass killers of
 >modern history transformed their victims into depersonalized abstractions,
 >making them easier to kill. Much the way Stalin, citing Communist dogma,
 >ordered the murder of millions of peasants toward "the elimination of the
 >Kulaks as a class," so Kaczynski rationalized his murders as necessary to
 >solve "the technology problem."
 >
 >The conditions that produce violence continue to flourish. Despite their
 >historically unprecedented affluence, many middle-class Americans,
 >particularly the educated elite, are still gripped by despair. The
 >education system continues to promote bleak visions of the future.
 >Meanwhile, alienating ideologies, offering the false promise of quick
 >solutions through violence, proliferate.
 >
 >Although most Americans strongly condemn terrorist acts committed in the
 >name of political agendas of which they do not approve, many turn a blind
 >eye toward savagery done in the name of ideals they share. Indeed, many are
 >reasonably comfortable with violence short of murder, as long as it's done
 >for a cause they support. It was easy for Americans to unite in condemning
 >the World Trade Center and Oklahoma City bombings, because few approved of
 >the bombers' goals: the destruction of the state of Israel and of the U.S.
 >government. But some conservatives seem to be untroubled by anti-abortion
 >bombings or by the rise of armed militias, and some liberals consistently
 >condone or ignore the proliferation of terrorism putatively committed on
 >behalf of animals or the environment.
 >
 >Not surprisingly, then, ideologically inspired violence has become
 >increasingly commonplace -- tolerated and sometimes even praised. Just
 >after the bombing at the 1996 Atlanta Olympics, The Wall Street Journal
 >noted that terrorism "has become a part of life."
 >
 >According to the FBI, explosive and incendiary bombings doubled during the
 >first four years of the 1990s. And although the number of such incidents
 >has declined slightly since that time, certain kinds of "single-issue"
 >terrorism -- including acts committed on behalf of Kaczynski's cause of
 >choice, "saving wild nature" -- are becoming increasingly prominent. Last
 >year the director of the FBI, Louis Freeh, told Congress, "The most
 >recognizable single issue terrorists at the present time are those involved
 >in the violent animal rights, anti-abortion, and environmental protection
 >movements.... the potential for destruction has increased as terrorists
 >have turned toward large improvised explosive devices to inflict maximum
 >damage."
 >
 >After concluding a ten-month investigation of this phenomenon, the Portland
 >Oregonian reported last fall,
 >
 >Escalating sabotage to save the environment has inflicted tens of millions
 >of dollars in damage and placed lives at risk.... Arsons, bombings and
 >sabotage in the name of saving the environment and its creatures have swept
 >the American West over the last two decades, and Oregon is increasingly the
 >center of it. At least 100 major acts of such violence have occurred since
 >1980, causing $42.8 million in damages.
 >
 >
 >
 >The Oregonian found that "during the last four years alone, the West has
 >been rocked by 33 substantial incidents, with damages reaching $28.8
 >million." And although "these crimes started nearly two decades ago -- some
 >seem clearly inspired by Edward Abbey's 1975 novel, The Monkey Wrench Gang
 >-- they have escalated dangerously, sometimes with the use of bombs, in the
 >last six years."
 >
 >No one other than Kaczynski's three victims has yet been murdered by a
 >fanatical environmentalist, but investigators consider it merely a matter
 >of time before someone else is killed for similar reasons. "I think we've
 >come very close to that line," one federal agent told the Oregonian, "and
 >we will cross that line unless we deal with this problem."
 >
 >We may cross that line sooner than we think. In a September, 1998, letter
 >to me, Kaczynski wrote,
 >
 >I suspect that you underestimate the strength and depth of feeling against
 >industrial civilization that has been developing in recent years. I've been
 >surprised at some of the things that people have written to me. It looks to
 >me as if our society is moving into a pre-revolutionary situation. (By that
 >I don't mean a situation in which revolution is inevitable, but one in
 >which it is a realistic possibility.) The majority of people are
 >pessimistic or cynical about existing institutions, there is widespread
 >alienation and directionlessness among young people.... Perhaps all that is
 >needed is to give these forces appropriate organization and direction.
 >
 >
 >
 >Seen from that perspective, it might seem that the rest of society is only
 >a few steps behind Kaczynski. When Henry Murray spoke of the need to create
 >a new "World Man," this was not what he had in mind.
 >
 >(The online version of this article appears in four parts. Click here to go
 >to part one, part two, or part three.)
 >
 >
 >
 >------------------------------------------------------------------------
 >Alston Chase is the author of Playing God in Yellowstone (1986) and In a
 >Dark Wood (1995). He is at work on a book about Theodore Kaczynski.
 >
 >------------------------------------------------------------------------
 >Copyright © 2000 by The Atlantic Monthly Company. All rights reserved.
 >The Atlantic Monthly; June 2000; Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber -
 >00.06 (Part Four); Volume 285, No. 6; page 41-65.
 >
 >Discuss this article in the Education & Teaching conference of Post &
 >Riposte.
 >More on politics and society in The Atlantic Monthly and Atlantic Unbound.
 >Elsewhere on the Web
 >Links to related material on other Web sites.
 >
 >"Multiform Assessments of Personality Development Among Gifted College Men,
 >1941-1965," by Henry A. Murray
 >Henry A. Murray's abstract of the study to which he subjected Theodore
 >Kaczynski and other Harvard students. Posted by the Henry A. Murray
 >Research Center of the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study.
 >
 >The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer: Standing Trial? (January 16, 1998)
 >A transcript of The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer in which Elizabeth Farnsworth
 >speaks with experts about Theodore Kaczynski, mental competency, and the
law.
 >
 >Unabomber
 >Comprehensive coverage of the Unabomber trial by the Sacramento Bee.
 >Includes profiles of central figures, court transcripts and relevant
 >documents, photos, video clips, an archive of articles, and more.
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >              "Let Us Consider The Human Brain As
 >               A Very Complex Photographic Plate"
 >                    1957 G.H. Estabrooks
 >                   FOR   K A R E N  #01182
 >                  who died fighting  4/23/99
 >
 >                  lsharman@microage-tb.com
 >                      www.aches-mc.org
 >                        807-622-5407
 >
 >   For people like me, violence is the minotaur; we spend our lives
 >       wandering its maze, looking for the exit.  (Richard Rhodes)
 >
 >                  Never befriend the oppressed
 >                   unless you are prepared to
 >                   take on the oppressor.
 >                       (Author unknown)
 >
 >
"
***********************************
Lloyd Miller, Research Director for A-albionic Research (POB 20273,
Ferndale, MI 48220), a ruling class/conspiracy research resource for the
entire political-ideological spectrum.  Quarterly journal, book sales,
rare/out-of-print searches, New Paradigms Discussion List, Weekly Up-date
Lists & E-text Archive of research, intelligence, catalogs, & resources.
  To Discuss Ideas:
   mailto:lloyd@a-albionic.com      http://msen.com/~lloyd/
   For Ordering Info & Free Catalog:
    mailto:james@a-albionic.com    http://a-albionic.com/formaddress.html
   For Discussion List:
    mailto:majordomo@mail.msen.com
    text in body:  subscribe prj <your@email.address>
  **FREE RARE BOOK SEARCH: <freesearch@a-albionic.com> **
    Explore Our Archive:  <http://a-albionic.com/a-albionic.html>
***********************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:13:56 MDT