[harrym]

I know I’ll get zapped for this but anyway... I once read a book by Dr. Erich Neuman (sp?) called “Depth Psychology and the New Ethic”. He was a student of Jung and put forth a theory that, succinctly, purports that there are no victims only volunteers. In this case of an attack on a member of Congress, his theory would state this. Politicians in general and members of Congress in particular in our present day society are not looked upon favorably (see the polls that show them in the teens). The collective subconscious (see Jung again) is therefore not holding any of these folks in the House or the Senate in any kind of esteem. They have put themselves in this position by the actions of a good many of their members (sex scandals, bribes, consorting with lobbyist, etc.) In this atmosphere of non-approval by the collective, it is very likely that some individuals who have severe mental problems will seek out targets of opportunity based on how the targets themselves have shown up on the horizon. This is not to say that the individual target in this case is in anyway responsible but that she happened to be a member of a class that have made themselves into magnets for nutcases. The nutcases pick these folks because they are on the skyline and, since everybody (the collective) holds the targets as flawed individuals, it seems ok to target them.

OK, go ahead and flame me. I’ve made myself a target 8}.

[Candor7]

Jung has a synchronisic ( acausal)approach to explaining events. Few understad it.

But I agree with what you say in part. Its also like a cull
by predators of the weak from the herd.They act improperly as a class to the point where they are dehumanized, and when they appear on the fringe of the herd, they are singled out for attack by the predators, who as humans happen to be insane ( killing for no specific cause except rage).

However, the leftist vitriol censors would say it wrong to dehumanize the class of politucians and make them fringe targets for the insane, when in fact the process is organic and uncontrollable, beyond judgement in fact, because it is acausal, socially evolutionary, and merely a way of understanding what is happening.Only totalitarian social methods could put an end to what is arguably a natural process.That the herd will never accept.

So now we see elitists resigning, refusing to offer for further electoral terms, and party hacks resigning out of fear. They are right to do so, and merge with the herd so as to be unrecognizeable, at least according to this Jungian understanding.

The herd will hardly divide itself and go to war over the matter, it will just keep pushing the politicians and the insane out to the fringes, where they can feed on one another according to this Jungian approach.Perhaps eventually they will simply do each other in.And the truth is that the insanity is not only in the predator. The politicians have their own version of insanity, and one need not look too far into the conduct of various politicians to see a version of the same insanity that effects the predators themselves. They seem to have that in common and have a similarity of predatory function.

[Nowhere Man]

I know I’ll get zapped for this but anyway... I once read a book by Dr. Erich Neuman (sp?) called “Depth Psychology and the New Ethic”. He was a student of Jung and put forth a theory that, succinctly, purports that there are no victims only volunteers. In this case of an attack on a member of Congress, his theory would state this. Politicians in general and members of Congress in particular in our present day society are not looked upon favorably (see the polls that show them in the teens). The collective subconscious (see Jung again) is therefore not holding any of these folks in the House or the Senate in any kind of esteem. They have put themselves in this position by the actions of a good many of their members (sex scandals, bribes, consorting with lobbyist, etc.) In this atmosphere of non-approval by the collective, it is very likely that some individuals who have severe mental problems will seek out targets of opportunity based on how the targets themselves have shown up on the horizon. This is not to say that the individual target in this case is in anyway responsible but that she happened to be a member of a class that have made themselves into magnets for nutcases. The nutcases pick these folks because they are on the skyline and, since everybody (the collective) holds the targets as flawed individuals, it seems ok to target them.

You said the same thing my father said, but he said in in a couple of sentences. He said about Judge Roll who decided in favor of illegal aliens, "in the eyes of many, paid the ultimate price for his decision" which was not liked by many. I'm a believer in karma, maybe this could be karma, I don't know. I know I might get some guff for this but this angle has to be covered too as you pointed out where unpopular people unfortunately make themselves targets for nutcases. My father added, "the politicians must share the blame of bringing public anger on themselves," and with the lame duck Congress' action, it has angered many. Most people know to control their anger into a constructive channel, but again, unpopular people make themselves targets for nutcases out there.

If I offended anyone, I do apologize, but I do think you brought out a factor that should be discussed and looked at even though it might not look good to do so.