Scientology/Newtown shooting spree, 3rd and 4th dynamic abberation, etc.
I just read your last question and answer and it made me want to know more. Why is it that the third and forth dynamics are weaker in the US than other countries? I'm from Canada but I remember the first time I went down to the US, I noticed a big change. Everything seemed bigger, brighter, and more cold. People seemed to pay less attention to each other and seem to be more in their own worlds. So I can definitely see that myself. But I'm just wondering why that is.
What are your thoughts on the Newtown shooting? Was the gunman an SP? Mentally ill? He was reportedly on an antipsychotic. Was this someone who has been an SP for lifetimes or did something happen to him this lifetime to make him that way? How much responsibility do you think is to blame on the antipsychotic he was on? I couldn't understand why anyone would do this but when I found out he was on antipsychotics, and one that has had reports of inducing violence in patients rather than curbing it, it clicked for me. I would think someone who was drugged up would have an easier time doing something like that. Why do you think he did it? To cause shock and abberation? He targeted 6 and 7 year olds, so that makes me think he was trying to cause the most shock and grief. I've had a bit of a hard time trying to come to terms with what happened and I would love to have some Scientology insight into it. Thanks.
I don't know WHY the 3rd and 4th dynamics are weaker in the US. I just notice that they are.
One might speculate as to a variety of reasons. We're an admixture of transplanted peoples, none living (aside from native Americans) in ancestral lands rich with tradition and custom that binds societies together, so the duty to forbears and the culture at large is weakened by that. There is, nationally, no uniformity of custom and purpose, owing to our multi-varied origins, and so the fabric that binds the entire national body politic is weakened by that.
Due to the size of the country, the even climate, and the cornucopia of easily-accessible resources that greeted settlers, from waterways to arable land, to mineral wealth, to forests, to game, you name it, settlement spread across the country with comparative lightning speed. This resulted in towns and cities with great gulfs between them, and little to nothing in common, save a mostly-common language.
Then you had slavery and its heritage, which created distinct immiscible classes of people.
US immigrants initially arrived from societies with a good deal of repression and enforced conformity, to say nothing of authoritarian insistence on national loyalty. So our constitution went out of its way to elevate the rights and the importance of the individual well above any duty to national well-being. I think the founders may have assumed the latter would naturally grow from having defeated a common enemy together, living in proximity with each other, and having European heritages in common. As it turns out, however, the more liberty you offer a person, the more they are likely to take - and succeeding generations were all-too-eager to ditch the loyalties of the past in favor of loyalty to self.
Combine the above factors with a fledgling central government and initially weak enforcement mechanisms and pure, unregulated capitalism, and soon you have an entire nation of people, each dedicated to getting their own, no matter what it took, which led to a good deal of lawlessness, both ordinary and commercial. Individual strove against individual, trying to gain an advantage. This was expected and ordinary, under the circumstances.
So, the worship of the every-man-for-himself ethic rose to prominence in this country, and never entirely died out.
So to begin with, a nation-wide sense of community and cohesiveness simply was unlikely to grow in this soil of its own accord. Too many different kinds of people, too much space, too little need/opportunity for cooperation on a routine basis, too much opportunity to become so fabulously wealthy, overnight, so that one "didn't need" anyone else. Add to this the isolating and stigmatizing effects of people being hung with mental "disorder" labels and fed dehumanizing drugs (activities that happen with greater prevalence in the United States than anywhere in the world), and every individual person becomes even more isolated.
An additional factor is an unregulated, "free," commercial press. Media the world over thrives on conflict, but nowhere so much as here, PLUS, we don't have laws like in Canada that require a "news" organization, if it call itself such, to at least try to tell the truth. This leave media here free to CREATE its own controversies, out of thin air, which further divide people. Every conspiracy theorist and rumor monger has a megaphone with which to spread fear and division.
I'm sure I can think of more factors, but the above is a pretty rich stew.
I think Lanza did what he did because a) that was the school he attended as a child, b) he was isolated, not a member of a community, c) he was stigmatized, d) he wasn't entirely "right" in the head, perhaps (though strong community and less isolation might actually have helped that), e) his mom was a "prepper" with a strong sense of impending doom and lotsa guns, both of which she shared with her son, and f) he was fed an antipsychotic drug known to make some people more irrational, and more violent.
That's possibly all the light I can shed on this in a reasonably short space of writing.