This guy shows up at any opportunity in documentaries or in books about Kaczynski, and in my opinion, does not come off well in this or in a lot of other stuff.
He made a decision. So did his brother as a consequence - non-contact. Continuing to barrage someone for years with letters someone does not want to receive (likely never read, either) in an attempt to assuage your own guilt is not loving behavior, and at worst is borderline abusive. The fact he felt he had a right to handle his brother's remains at the end, to the point he was berating the prison staff feels like it's indicative of the kind of thing I'm getting at. Ted was a person who had expressly desired to have nothing to do with his family, at some point you simply have to respect that whether you like it or not if you love them. This seems all about his own guilt and a lot less about his brother. I don't know if anyone here has ever been subjected to this by an estranged family member trying to make amends that will never be amended, but it really sucks to be on the other end of it, no matter what crime you may have committed.
Honestly I would feel guilty too. I would have made the same decision. However, I'd understand the consequences, and if I truly loved my brother as he says, I'd leave him alone, because that's what he wanted.
I had to block one of my former best friend's numbers recently. A few years ago they treated me really badly. A year later they reached out to apologize. I forgave them, but they kept reaching out after i made it clear that despite the fact I'm willing to forgive them, I'm not interested in going back to being friends. Even after explicitly saying the words "please do not keep texting me" they kept it up--always apologetic, but clearly not getting the point.
I'm probably about to do so for the second time. This isn't the only former friend i don't want reaching me. I moved halfway across the country too so it probably makes sense
I’ve always been really confused why Kaczynski didn’t just publish a book through the usual channels. A niche publisher, perhaps, but surely he could have gotten interest with his credentials?
Most everyone agrees turning in Kaczynski was a good thing. And in the article it mentions he made peace with the fact it was a good thing.
The thing I think David had to contend with was not whether it was good or bad, but the impetus with which it was conducted. His wife hated Ted before any of this. You can almost see the rage in her eyes about him when you watch documentaries on the subject. She led him in every way in getting Ted tossed away (and I think knowing this victory for her would come at the cost of her husband)-- David would have left it in his subconscious and Ted would have been found later (probably after more victims) in some other way.
David had to contend with the fact that you did the right thing because your hateful wife nudged you to do it, and that intent seemed to be more like 'how do we get rid of Ted' than 'lets save people'. AFAIK he is still married, so this is the key bit left out of these articles that David can't write our say out loud and you just have to read it between the lines.
I don't know that there were any good solutions for him. Probably the only way that wouldn't have felt like betrayal would have been for him to go up to Montana and deal with the problem himself, man to man, without the bit of giving him up to the FBI behind his back. Whether the prison time from that would have been worse than living with a lifetime of guilt, I have no idea, a difficult decision no doubt.
I also doubt he knew the realities of supermax. I won't debate the merits of supermax for Ted but even by prison standards there is an extreme level of isolation that is particularly psychologically damaging.
I honestly would not know how to handle knowing a family member was there, regardless of the severity of their crime. For me it would be much worse than knowing they were executed by firing squad or some maximum security prison where they can play paper chess with their cell mate all day.
guy was extreme end of the loner spectrum, probably into personality disorder range, and didnt mind solitude at all, the lack of freedom was probably what bothered him. he did maintain a ton of correspondence and probably ended up forming more relationships in a supermax than he ever had his entire previous life, by quite a bit.
This is an odd interpretation if the details cited in the NY Times articles are correct:
> When he informed Ted of his marriage plans, Ted, who had never met Ms. Patrik, fumed, and warned him, in what David called a “vicious” letter, that he was making the biggest mistake of his life. Ted then severed virtually all communication with him.
From this quote it seems like Ted Kaczynski had already cut off most communication with his brother w/out ever meeting the wife.
Ted wrote Dave many times after that when he needed something. Like money. The last memoir I could find on that link indicated Dave's wife went out of her way to stop Dave from attempting to see him again before the arrest.
I love how you made the wife into the evil one ... despite the fact that if you are right, she was completely in the right and nudged him to do the unambiguously right thing.
Also, per article, Ted cut most contact off whe he found out the brother is marrying and they were living isolated life with little to no in person meetings ... so the idea that she somehow needed to get rid of an absent person ... sounds mostly like motivated reasoning.
Get rid of doesn't just mean get the body away from their proximity. Ted wrote David letters about how much he disliked the woman and marriage. The wife and Ted hated each other by my assessment.
I don't think her obsession with matching up Ted to the Unabomber was driven by evil. It was driven by hate. Hateful people can do good things.
https://archive.md/80Hox
This guy shows up at any opportunity in documentaries or in books about Kaczynski, and in my opinion, does not come off well in this or in a lot of other stuff.
He made a decision. So did his brother as a consequence - non-contact. Continuing to barrage someone for years with letters someone does not want to receive (likely never read, either) in an attempt to assuage your own guilt is not loving behavior, and at worst is borderline abusive. The fact he felt he had a right to handle his brother's remains at the end, to the point he was berating the prison staff feels like it's indicative of the kind of thing I'm getting at. Ted was a person who had expressly desired to have nothing to do with his family, at some point you simply have to respect that whether you like it or not if you love them. This seems all about his own guilt and a lot less about his brother. I don't know if anyone here has ever been subjected to this by an estranged family member trying to make amends that will never be amended, but it really sucks to be on the other end of it, no matter what crime you may have committed.
Honestly I would feel guilty too. I would have made the same decision. However, I'd understand the consequences, and if I truly loved my brother as he says, I'd leave him alone, because that's what he wanted.
I had to block one of my former best friend's numbers recently. A few years ago they treated me really badly. A year later they reached out to apologize. I forgave them, but they kept reaching out after i made it clear that despite the fact I'm willing to forgive them, I'm not interested in going back to being friends. Even after explicitly saying the words "please do not keep texting me" they kept it up--always apologetic, but clearly not getting the point.
Shit does indeed suck.
I have changed my phone number once, in my entire lifetime.
Wish I had done this sooner / more often !
I'm probably about to do so for the second time. This isn't the only former friend i don't want reaching me. I moved halfway across the country too so it probably makes sense
I’ve always been really confused why Kaczynski didn’t just publish a book through the usual channels. A niche publisher, perhaps, but surely he could have gotten interest with his credentials?
Because he believed deeply that the system was evil. That would be like Osama Bin Laden trying to air his grievances on the Jerry Springer show.
Most everyone agrees turning in Kaczynski was a good thing. And in the article it mentions he made peace with the fact it was a good thing.
The thing I think David had to contend with was not whether it was good or bad, but the impetus with which it was conducted. His wife hated Ted before any of this. You can almost see the rage in her eyes about him when you watch documentaries on the subject. She led him in every way in getting Ted tossed away (and I think knowing this victory for her would come at the cost of her husband)-- David would have left it in his subconscious and Ted would have been found later (probably after more victims) in some other way.
David had to contend with the fact that you did the right thing because your hateful wife nudged you to do it, and that intent seemed to be more like 'how do we get rid of Ted' than 'lets save people'. AFAIK he is still married, so this is the key bit left out of these articles that David can't write our say out loud and you just have to read it between the lines.
I don't know that there were any good solutions for him. Probably the only way that wouldn't have felt like betrayal would have been for him to go up to Montana and deal with the problem himself, man to man, without the bit of giving him up to the FBI behind his back. Whether the prison time from that would have been worse than living with a lifetime of guilt, I have no idea, a difficult decision no doubt.
Any misgivings he has regardless of why he has them are surely compounded by the fact that Ted's written work aged like wine.
I also doubt he knew the realities of supermax. I won't debate the merits of supermax for Ted but even by prison standards there is an extreme level of isolation that is particularly psychologically damaging.
I honestly would not know how to handle knowing a family member was there, regardless of the severity of their crime. For me it would be much worse than knowing they were executed by firing squad or some maximum security prison where they can play paper chess with their cell mate all day.
Honestly, and I’d been reading this over the years - he seemed to have been thriving (in his own way). forgive the yahoo article:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/the-unabomber-s-not-so-lonely-pri...
guy was extreme end of the loner spectrum, probably into personality disorder range, and didnt mind solitude at all, the lack of freedom was probably what bothered him. he did maintain a ton of correspondence and probably ended up forming more relationships in a supermax than he ever had his entire previous life, by quite a bit.
This is an odd interpretation if the details cited in the NY Times articles are correct:
> When he informed Ted of his marriage plans, Ted, who had never met Ms. Patrik, fumed, and warned him, in what David called a “vicious” letter, that he was making the biggest mistake of his life. Ted then severed virtually all communication with him.
From this quote it seems like Ted Kaczynski had already cut off most communication with his brother w/out ever meeting the wife.
Ted wrote Dave many times after that when he needed something. Like money. The last memoir I could find on that link indicated Dave's wife went out of her way to stop Dave from attempting to see him again before the arrest.
https://www.thetedkarchive.com/library/ted-kaczynski-david-k...
[flagged]
I love how you made the wife into the evil one ... despite the fact that if you are right, she was completely in the right and nudged him to do the unambiguously right thing.
Also, per article, Ted cut most contact off whe he found out the brother is marrying and they were living isolated life with little to no in person meetings ... so the idea that she somehow needed to get rid of an absent person ... sounds mostly like motivated reasoning.
Get rid of doesn't just mean get the body away from their proximity. Ted wrote David letters about how much he disliked the woman and marriage. The wife and Ted hated each other by my assessment.
I don't think her obsession with matching up Ted to the Unabomber was driven by evil. It was driven by hate. Hateful people can do good things.
Or maybe it wad driven by realization he is likely the person killing people.
Considering it was Ted who had the provable track record of being the hateful one ...
Who knows? Maybe David's wife was the very first person to ever tell her spouse, "Your brother's an asshole."
/s