Ronald Brak

Because not everyone can be normal.

Sunday, December 20, 2015

Edward Teller Was A Grumpy Old Feller Who Could Blow You Under The Table

Edward Teller was a grumpy old feller,
Who some considered unstable,
Said Oppenheimer could be finer,
At the hearing table.

Thought nothing wrong with a hydrogen bomb,
At Port Hope Alaska,
Wanted nuclear bombs to get oil from,
The tar sands in Alberta,

Told Israel how not to fail,
At building nukes for a bomber,
Had a heart attack, his composture cracked,
And he blamed it on Jane Fonda. 

Thought nukes in space would win the arms race,
Was very fond of the Gipper,
His claims inflated, he exagerated,
Because his lips didn't come with a zipper.

Stanislaw he treated poor,
No credit did he give to he,
Since he's no more it's time to take score,
Intelligence 18  Wisdom 3. 

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, December 12, 2015

The Rise In US Mass Shootings - A Just So Story

Why do Americans shoot each other so often?  Or rather, why does a heavily armed American shoot unarmed strangers or people he hardly knows and then usually shoots himself or is killed by police or security guards or extremely rarely by an armed citizen?  And why are these incidents increasing in frequency?

Well, an obvious reason is easy access to a large number of guns.  And not just double barrelled shotguns and bolt action rifles that may only hold 4 or 5 rounds, but anti-personnel pistols and assault rifles made for the sole purpose of shooting humans.

And they have a very violent culture by developed country standards stemming from multiple sources that include the extermination of indigenous Americans and Mexicans by private citizens, dehumanizing religion, the use of fear to obtain political power, and a great deal of racism.

But guns and a violent culture don't really explain the rise in mass shootings in the United States this century and facial explanations such as computer games don't really ring true.  Almost every American male child plays violent computer games, but very few go on to commit mass shootings.  And if it was that simple then I think that back in the days when most children lived on farms, boys regularly slaughtering and shooting real live animals would have had more of an effect.  

So I gathered some thoughts I've had over the years and put them down into a "just so" story.  I don't believe this story is correct.  Especially now that I've organized my thoughts and written them down and had time to reflect on them.  And if any of it is correct it's only part of the "true" story.  The only real policy  recommendation you could pull from this would boil down to don't let people get alienated, but if you do, by god, don't let them get their hands on guns.


Jets Jumping Sharks

Forty years ago it was common for young men to be members of a gang. It didn’t really matter how socially maladjusted one was, a gang would typically take you on as a member based simply on your ethnicity, locality, class, or ability to own a motorbike. This was simply because each new recruit strengthened a gang in relation to other gangs. While a person might be low in a gang’s hierarchy, each and every member was useful and valued provided they were loyal to the gang and not cowards when it came to a fight. Provided a person had the ability to engage in violence there was a place for them. There were no losers in a gang.
Gang culture no longer exists for many American young males, particularly white ones. Instead of gangs vying for rep there is now an individualistic winner takes all culture where socially maladjusted males can end up as complete losers at the bottom of the social order with no gang membership to give them support or a place or make them feel valued. And when these individuals lash out violently the results can be horriffic.
Gang culture was the cause of a great deal of violence and crime. That’s the reason why it has been broken down and removed to such an extent. However, while a youth with a prospensity for violence could earn themselves a high status position in a gang, they would also find their violence reigned in and channeled by other members. There would be rules to be followed and even when extreme violence was committed on rival gang members attempts would be made to limit harm to bystanders because it would otherwise be detrimental to the gang as a whole.
This is one reason why we generally don’t see African Americans perpetrating mass shootings. Firstly, they are on average exposed to more gang culture and even those that have little or nothing to do with it are still part of a discriminated against minority with an outside enemy to struggle against – racism – and are automatically members of group united in struggle which gives them a place and value. I am not suggesting that the camaraderie that can be found in oppression compensates for it, but there is strength to be found in adversity.
Religious mass murder is a little different. In this case there are basically gangs where status is earned by suicidal acts of extreme violence. It is self defeating, but can be extremely damaging to those who become points on a dead murder’s scoreboard and those left behind.
- See more at: http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2015/12/what-is-the-best-theory-for-the-rise-in-mass-shootings.html#comments
Forty years ago it was common for young men to be members of a gang. It didn’t really matter how socially maladjusted one was, a gang would typically take you on as a member based simply on your ethnicity, locality, class, or ability to own a motorbike. This was simply because each new recruit strengthened a gang in relation to other gangs. While a person might be low in a gang’s hierarchy, each and every member was useful and valued provided they were loyal to the gang and not cowards when it came to a fight. Provided a person had the ability to engage in violence there was a place for them. There were no losers in a gang.
Gang culture no longer exists for many American young males, particularly white ones. Instead of gangs vying for rep there is now an individualistic winner takes all culture where socially maladjusted males can end up as complete losers at the bottom of the social order with no gang membership to give them support or a place or make them feel valued. And when these individuals lash out violently the results can be horriffic.
Gang culture was the cause of a great deal of violence and crime. That’s the reason why it has been broken down and removed to such an extent. However, while a youth with a prospensity for violence could earn themselves a high status position in a gang, they would also find their violence reigned in and channeled by other members. There would be rules to be followed and even when extreme violence was committed on rival gang members attempts would be made to limit harm to bystanders because it would otherwise be detrimental to the gang as a whole.
This is one reason why we generally don’t see African Americans perpetrating mass shootings. Firstly, they are on average exposed to more gang culture and even those that have little or nothing to do with it are still part of a discriminated against minority with an outside enemy to struggle against – racism – and are automatically members of group united in struggle which gives them a place and value. I am not suggesting that the camaraderie that can be found in oppression compensates for it, but there is strength to be found in adversity.
Religious mass murder is a little different. In this case there are basically gangs where status is earned by suicidal acts of extreme violence. It is self defeating, but can be extremely damaging to those who become points on a dead murder’s scoreboard and those left behind.
- See more at: http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2015/12/what-is-the-best-theory-for-the-rise-in-mass-shootings.html#comments
Forty years ago it was common for young men to be members of a gang. It didn’t really matter how socially maladjusted one was, a gang would typically take you on as a member based simply on your ethnicity, locality, class, or ability to own a motorbike. This was simply because each new recruit strengthened a gang in relation to other gangs. While a person might be low in a gang’s hierarchy, each and every member was useful and valued provided they were loyal to the gang and not cowards when it came to a fight. Provided a person had the ability to engage in violence there was a place for them. There were no losers in a gang. 
 
Gang culture no longer exists for many American young males, particularly white ones. Instead of gangs vying for rep there is now an individualistic winner takes all culture where socially maladjusted males can end up as complete losers at the bottom of the social order with no gang membership to give them support or a place or make them feel valued. And when these individuals lash out violently the results can be horrific.

Gang culture was the cause of a great deal of violence and crime. That’s the reason why it has been broken down and removed to such an extent. However, while a youth with a prospensity for violence could earn themselves a high status position in a gang, they would also find their violence reigned in and channeled by other members. There would be rules to be followed and even when extreme violence was committed on rival gang members attempts would be made to limit harm to bystanders because it would otherwise be detrimental to the gang as a whole.

This is one reason why we generally don’t see African Americans perpetrating mass shootings. Firstly, they are on average exposed to more gang culture and even those that have little or nothing to do with it are still part of a discriminated against minority with an outside enemy to struggle against – racism – and are automatically members of group united in struggle which gives them a place and value. I am not suggesting that the camaraderie that can be found in oppression compensates for it, but there is strength to be found in adversity.

Religious mass murder is a little different. In this case there are basically gangs where status is earned by suicidal acts of extreme violence. It is self defeating, but can be extremely damaging to those who become points on a dead murder’s scoreboard and those left behind.


Forty years ago it was common for young men to be members of a gang. It didn’t really matter how socially maladjusted one was, a gang would typically take you on as a member based simply on your ethnicity, locality, class, or ability to own a motorbike. This was simply because each new recruit strengthened a gang in relation to other gangs. While a person might be low in a gang’s hierarchy, each and every member was useful and valued provided they were loyal to the gang and not cowards when it came to a fight. Provided a person had the ability to engage in violence there was a place for them. There were no losers in a gang.
Gang culture no longer exists for many American young males, particularly white ones. Instead of gangs vying for rep there is now an individualistic winner takes all culture where socially maladjusted males can end up as complete losers at the bottom of the social order with no gang membership to give them support or a place or make them feel valued. And when these individuals lash out violently the results can be horriffic.
Gang culture was the cause of a great deal of violence and crime. That’s the reason why it has been broken down and removed to such an extent. However, while a youth with a prospensity for violence could earn themselves a high status position in a gang, they would also find their violence reigned in and channeled by other members. There would be rules to be followed and even when extreme violence was committed on rival gang members attempts would be made to limit harm to bystanders because it would otherwise be detrimental to the gang as a whole.
This is one reason why we generally don’t see African Americans perpetrating mass shootings. Firstly, they are on average exposed to more gang culture and even those that have little or nothing to do with it are still part of a discriminated against minority with an outside enemy to struggle against – racism – and are automatically members of group united in struggle which gives them a place and value. I am not suggesting that the camaraderie that can be found in oppression compensates for it, but there is strength to be found in adversity.
Religious mass murder is a little different. In this case there are basically gangs where status is earned by suicidal acts of extreme violence. It is self defeating, but can be extremely damaging to those who become points on a dead murder’s scoreboard and those left behind.
- See more at: http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2015/12/what-is-the-best-theory-for-the-rise-in-mass-shootings.html#comments

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,