yelsgib

Even reading the title of this sent me into a downward spiral of intense paranoia/hatred/annoyance/terror. Was gift giving not already enough of a stilted, rote interaction? Do we need to systematize EVERYTHING!?! Is there no escape from this? What have we become?

Stop. Fast-forward.

First of all, you're picking on a very small point. The fact that I referred to this guy/kid/whatever as a "child" isn't really crucial to my argument except perhaps in a pretty indirect/connotative manner.

Second of all, to me, this kid is a child. I know some 30+ year old grown-ass men and women who are children. I was remarking on his (apparent) lack of maturity and his position within the community (still living with parents, pulling [admittedly extreme] "pranks", not living with the consequences of his actions).

I agree that to be an adult you need responsibility and that to get there you must increasingly suffer the consequences of your actions. My point (which you have avoided responding to entirely) centers on the fact that, in the US and the UK, turning ANYONE (child or adult) over to the "authorities" is not any sort of reasonable or useful consequence and, what's more, that it is disturbing to me that this particular idea of "punishment" or "consequences" or "justice" or whatever seems to continue to penetrate the public consciousness.

I don't feed trolls.

Yes, I believe we should surround them with love and forgiveness.

We also should -have- provided them with love and forgiveness so that they would feel comfortable talking about their problems before they could result in severe issues.

What do -you- suggest we do? Beat them up? "Teach them a lesson?" What will that accomplish, exactly?

---

Let me just say that I sense a great deal of pain in you. This is not an attack. Your points seem to be based in fear and anger - you are being very reactive rather than clearly laying out a well-reasoned argument. E.g. contrast your response to my own - yours relies on ad hominem and caricature and then finally a straw man argument. You seem sad. I hope you're OK. Hope!

Who do you trust to administer punishment?

What did they do to earn that trust?

The concept that one class of humans is the "punishers" who are teaching the other class(es) underlies most (if not all) fascist/authoritarian/racist ideologies of the last 3 centuries.

Of course you don't see what's wrong with punishing behavior that has been deemed unacceptable by society. Unfortunately, behavior that society is largely OK with (e.g. drug use) is punished nontheless - unfortunately, society can (and has often been) quite wrong about what should be punished (homosexuality, female sexuality, prostitution, sexual "perversion," drug & alcohol use, to name a few).

The fact is that the kid involved in this story didn't do anything "wrong" that could be easily trained out of him. Probably he has a whole set of complicated complexes of problems. For instance, one thing that many people in the US and UK (and other places) seem to suffer from is sexual/touch deprivation. Maybe if the kid were getting laid instead of playing on his laptop he wouldn't have engaged in such weirdo behaviors. I'm just sayin' - legalize drugs and prostitution and 99% of these problems go away.

In my opinion, to situate this conversation in a framework where "alternatives" are to be considered is to already assume an authoritarian stance. I believe that the model you are assuming is one in which there is some sort of established "government" which selects among alternative systems sharing the property that they are maintained by varying degrees of implicit/explicit use of force.

I would never claim to know how to set up a working mental health system or a functional system of criminal rehabilitation. What I claim is that the properties that these institutions have in the U.S. are MAINLY determined by historical accumulation (trauma -> reaction) rather than by organic growth from well-defined principles. I advocate the decompilation of these institutions and the organic outgrowth of new, community-based (preferably non-governmental) institutions.

I agree that there may be cases in which a "criminal" (your word, not mine) must be separated out from society [1], but that these cases are far, far rarer than most people believe. Most "criminals" in the U.S. are ethnic minorities suffering under an incoherent and evil system of drug criminalization.

From an unsystematic/non-governmental standpoint, I also believe that society needs to do more work in increasing its acceptance of different psychological and mental needs from a younger age. I'm very lucky that I was put in a "gifted" program because, had such a program not existed, my rage would have been intense, long-lasting, and I honestly may have killed someone. If my talents had been treated as a "difference" in the way that most peoples' are (exclusion from social events, bullying, emotional and mental abuse, punishment, etc.) I would have turned out very differently indeed.

Perhaps the reason that I feel so strongly about this topic is that there is a great deal of darkness in me (I don't believe everyone is like this). I throw a tremendous amount of personal effort at overcoming it/transforming it/thinking about whether it's really "darkness." During certain periods of history (including this one) homosexuality was seen as "darkness" in many places - now we think back on these periods as being backwards/bigoted/wrong. I must accept that some of my personal darkness is NOT bad/evil (e.g. some of my perverse sexual tastes) but that it only APPEARS bad to many people in society. I have come, through discussion and queer community support, to accept parts of myself that I have been ridiculed for and told were evil from a very young age - which ridicule and torment drove me deep into despair and hatred.

I suppose that I am ultimately advocating acceptance of darkness because I don't really believe in darkness. I believe that if we accept what we currently think about as dark (ultimately, for instance, it would be great if we could accept death) then we will see that it is not so dark after all.

THEN WE CAN LIVE HAPPILY EVER AFTER, THE END.

-----

[1] Let me be clear, here. I can't even really name any. Maybe certain serial killers/mass murderers - but who else? Who, really, needs to be put in permanent time-out, anymore? Can you even name anyone?

What is the difference between a "reasonable, rational" individual and an "unreasonable, irrational" individual?

What is the basis of your faith in "credible mental health professionals?"

It's unfortunate that you have such strong authoritarian beliefs. Can I convince you that your ideas that criminals (this child is 17 - he has not, by our own state's very definition - attained an age where he can be defined as a criminal or where he can knowingly enter into the social moral contract that binds adults) "need to be taught that their behavior is unacceptable" is a very modern one and - what's more - one that is supported by state propaganda?

Do you actually believe that anyone who enters the prison system is "taught that their behavior is unacceptable?" Many sources indicate that the more common response to incarceration is "criminalization" - that this child has a high probability of connecting with negative forces which will push him further down the path of his darkness.

I recommend you read "Discipline and Punish" by Foucault - I think it would open your ideas to the genealogy of some of the ideals underpinning your beliefs and apparent faith in the modern justice system.

Neither do imply nor do I believe that a "loving community" can waive a magic wand and make this sick child better. I do believe that it is more or less the only chance he has. There is ample evidence that our justice system and public mental health facilities are woefully inadequate for dealing with mental disturbances which are increasingly abundant in society. The idea that "professionals" are somehow intrinsically capable of dealing with these sorts of problems is one of the more troubling and pervasive myths in the United States (at least among people I know/have met/in the beliefs of the people as presented in the media). I'm not an expert, but my impression is that ther countries known for having better track records w/r/t criminal and mental rehabilitation (Norway, Finland, Japan) have stronger community structures and a more communal-based jail/asylum system.

What do you imagine happening to this child once he begins receiving professional help - (and let's be clear, here - I am advocating professional help - e.g. I think it's good that the child will go to counseling) - from the authorities that be? If he is put into jail he has a high probability of becoming criminalized (attaching to a community of criminals ) - if he is put into an asylum he has a good chance of becoming institutionalized. What is the root of your faith in our prison/mental health system? I honestly want to know.

It seems that your belief might stem in the idea that the child's parents are somehow morally or intellectually weak and that therefore the government has to step in and be the child's "strong father/mother." Is this correct? If so, why do you believe that government agencies deserve this sort of power? Have they earned it?

For those of you who claim that the right thing in this situation would be to turn the child over to the authorities - what exactly do you think the authorities are going to do to make this situation better? The child obviously has some darkness that he needs to work through - to work through darkness he needs the support of a loving community. I find it very sad and disturbing that some commenters (who I assume are adults) believe that the right thing to do is to hand a child like this over to the police or mental institutions. This idea that the police are some sort of magical wand that you can wave at problems to make them go away is at the center of our (our here meaning the US & Britain's) social decay (c.f. the current treatment of drug abusers, ethnic minorities, and the "mentally ill" in the United States).

Assuming this story is true, what OP did was the right, human, adult thing to do - to treat the child as a human being capable of change and growth and to see to it that the community accepted him and moved him towards change. Concepts like "justice" and "psychosis" are easy to throw around and are very practical, but their use is typically the root of more harm than good.

What's the slowest book you've read?

The post is not arguing against conformity - it is arguing against submission. It is arguing against a system that rewards submission.

I believe that a generation of extremely sophisticated, powerful, people who are eager to submit is a powerful and evil tool.

Fashionable status symbols are means by which one man dominates another. Many believe that a society of mutual respect will not seek tools of domination.

The issue with hierarchies is that they are historically weapons of oppression wielded against the marginal and unprivileged.

The issue with listening to what your friends think is cool is that your friends might be twats.

There really are problems with these behaviors, categorically. There really is a problem with submission, categorically. We are animals, we are spirits, we are not robots.

There's nothing wrong with robots. Be a robot if you want to. There are many people eager to use and reward you.

Try reading this with a sense of wonder, rather than as a heavy piece of social commentary.

Great comment, and I mostly agree :)

Slight digression, but I was interested in your last few sentences. Why do you not think that math or physics have an end game? I think that academic mathematics is dead/worthless, for instance.

Maybe you're talking about the difference between "ideals" and the incarnations of those ideals.

Capitalism is indeed an ideal, but its incarnation (so-called "global capitalism") might disappear as the dominant mode of human interaction. Here's hoping. This has happened in the past, right? E.g. there is no "Feudalism" as such, any more, even if concepts of feudalism are used.

Similarly (going back to Math), "Math" as such will never die - but its incarnation (the mass of all people doing all Math) might have an end game.

I'd actually love a math revolution, since I love math, but it doesn't look like it's going to be easy to re-invigorate it.

Almost all societal problems are essentially organizational problems. E.g. food distribution.

What do you expect the "center" of a food distribution network (Koch Brothers) to look like, besides a big fat cat? A big fat cat isn't too bad, as long as it's sleepy.

These people - Page, Musk, Schmidt, etc. - are about organizing the minds of society, so they are going to be different. Fat heads with big old asteroid-mining ideas :)