”No Admittance”--Life Confined to the Hospital Crib

Among other things, this paper explores the difficulties sponsored by mars in Pisces. More is written about it and its influence to various houses and Angles in the paper on Charles Whitman, the sniper in the tower at University of Texas, Austin--Paper About Whitman, in the section about Gregory Godzik in the paper on pedophilia--Synastry Between Godzik and Gacy, in the appendices about Elvis Presley and about Nikola Tesla in the paper about Dag Hammarskjöld--Paper About Hammarskjöld, and in the paper on Eric Harris--Paper About Eric Harris. There is also more about mars in Pisces, with timing, in the Appendix to this paper. September, 2012: Mars in Pisces is one focus in this more recent paper on three Mass Murderers--James O Huberty (McDonalds), Thomas Hamilton (Dunblane, Scotland), and Timothy McVeigh (Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building). Data from the earlier Harris and Whitman papers is brought into the conclusion. This latter paper also explores the importance of afflicted "parent charts" in producing social pathology. Here is the link Paper on Mass Murderers.
Return to Home Page, Links to More Papers

The first two, in 1978 and 1979, a shoe-box sized parcel and a “Phillies” brand cigar box, respectively, were placed at Northwestern University. Each injured one person.

His third bomb, in late 1979, was placed in the cargo hold of American Airlines flight 444. Designed to detonate as the air pressure decreased, it exploded but caused only a shock and smoke. The flight made an emergency landing, and passengers were treated for smoke inhalation (and, no doubt, fright).

In 1980 he sent a bomb disguised to look like a book to United Airlines President, Percy Wood, injuring him.

The bomb placed in a building at the University of Utah in 1981 was a large, paper-wrapped parcel placed under a window facing a hallway. Considered suspicious, it was X-rayed and defused.

The two bombs in 1982, one a “homemade green cylindrical box” on top of a wooden box (it was gasoline on top of a detonator) and the other a box bound to a binder with an unusual rubber band, were mailed to University professors. Each injured one person. One of them was an engineering student who wanted to become an astronaut. That day that dream died forever. Only by luck--he opened the binder like a book instead of frontally, which would have resulted in his instant death--did the student also not die forever.1985 was Kaczynski’s most active year. He mailed two bombs and placed two others. One bomb was discovered and defused. Three people were injured by the next two explosives. The fourth killed Hugh Campbell Scrutton, owner of a RenTech computer rental store in Sacramento, California. He lived long enough to yell, “Oh, my God! Somebody help me.!” Then he died. The bomb, in the parking lot behind his store, looked like a block of wood with nails protruding out of it. He was moving it out of harm’s way. Scrutton was the first man Kaczynski killed.

1987 was the last year in which Kaczynski actually placed a bomb. He left another “block of wood” in a parking lot behind a computer store in Salt Lake City. Another man, Gary Wright, was injured.

Kaczynski’s last four bombs--two in 1993, one in 1994, and one in 1995--were all mailed. The two mailed in 1993 were sent to men who also had doctorates. Both were seriously injured. The bomb mailed in 1994 went to an advertising executive. He was killed. The bomb in 1995 went to a timber industry lobbyist. His successor opened the bomb and was killed instantly.

Each bomb event is covered in more detail under its date of occurrence, in the Appendix.

When Kaczynski initiated his trail of terror, law enforcement involved in each incident did not suspect a serial bomber. Even after federal authorities suspected their man was a serial bomber, they did not inform the public. They did start a file, meticulously collect evidence, try to get a good profile, and so on. After a while, they had a number of names for the bomber based on his approach: the Junkyard Bomber because all his materials were either from dismantled junk or so common they were untraceable, the University Bomber (obvious), the Airline Bomber (obvious), and the Good Samaritan bomber (the blocks of wood meant to harm the good Samaritan who picked them up). Unabomber, by which moniker Kaczynski eventually became known, came from UNABOMB, the first letters from the universities and airlines which he targeted.

Kaczynski was even labeled The New York Times bomber because he promised to stop bombing when The Times and The New York Post printed his Manifesto. After many considerations, they eventually did print his Manifesto on September 19, 1995--eight full pages worth. Their hope, of course, was that some one, some where, would recognize the writing and identify the man who wrote it.

Some one did recognize the writer. David Kaczynski, Ted’s brother, recognized turns of phrase and relatively unique viewpoints in the writing. At first he did not want to believe his brother was the Unabomber. After further examination and much soul-searching, David initiated the approach which led to his brother’s capture. Kaczynski was arrested April 3, 1996 without incident at his Thoreau-like cabin in the woods outside of Lincoln, Montana.

A number of his fellow Montanans just called him “the Hermit.” They rarely saw him. He was eccentric and independent, shy and laconic, a man apparently intent on self-sufficiency. In the Lincoln area of Montana, where he had been living since 1971, he didn’t stand out as that different. At least, his behavior did not raise any alarms. When he did come into town, he was always polite. He was always clean even if not well-dressed. He didn’t bother any one.

Several year prior to moving to Montana he had taught at the University of California at Berkeley. He had secured the coveted two-year contract of assistant professor (mathematics) there following his graduation with a Ph.D. from the University of Michigan. People there barely remembered him.

One of his roommates, Patrick McIntosh, at Eliot House, where Kaczynski lived a year while at Harvard pursuing his undergraduate degree, later said of Kaczynski, “he was the hardest man to get to know I ever met.” (57)

Prior to going to undergraduate school at Harvard at the age of 16, Kaczynski grew up in a suburb of Chicago. His mother interrupted her teaching to raise him and his younger brother. His father was a factory worker, a failed entrepreneur in sausage-making. Their oldest son skipped two grades, one in elementary, and one in high school.

On May 4, 1998 Kaczynski was sentenced to four consecutive life terms plus 30 years.

There is more to Kaczynski’s story. Much more. I cover some of it as I introduce the astrology representing him, his life, his attributes.

In this paper, using astrology, I address the following areas of Ted Kaczynski’s life:

• Why was he so anti-establishment, especially anti-technology?
• Was--as his mother believed--his traumatic hospital experience at 9 months really the beginning of his illness?
• Was Kaczynski crazy? As one Federal prison doctor put it, was he paranoid schizophrenic?
• What made Kaczynski so bright?
• What made him so anti-social?
• Why mail bombs?
• Why didn’t this attractive, intelligent man marry? According to his own words, he wanted to.
• What forces formed him?
• What turned him from a disgruntled bachelor into a killer?
• What, if anything, shows the timing for his bombs?

Before we start looking at charts, some statements about this particular astrological method are in order:

The charts shown below are all partial charts. In them, all birth planets and their harmonics are inside the circle. All conception planets and their harmonics are outside the circle. An easier way to differentiate them is: blue planets inside the circle are birth planets; if they are not blue, they are birth harmonic planets. Red planets outside the circle are conception planets; if they are not red; then they are conception harmonic planets. Birth planets and their harmonics rule birth houses. Conception planets and their harmonics rule conception houses.

Here are the two most important links needed for comprehending the astrology used in this paper: Empirically-Derived Chart Reading Rules, About This Method. The latter paper also discloses the method used to find conception, but the actual instructions for same are found in the following paper: Formula for Finding Conception.

The Home Page (link at top of page) discusses the unique suitability of this form of astrology to scientific method. For those who do not want to read any of these papers, I have this reminder: this method uses only conjunctions, applying and separating squares, and oppositions. Planets so related to each other are set to be in the same “set.” The acceptable orb of influence when they include lights is 5°, with 5° considered very wide. Orbs for planets in sets without lights is about 2°, as is that for Angle/planet. The orb for progressions of Angles to planets, or vice versa, is 1°.

By “lights” I mean sun, moon, and moon’s nodes. Seen from the point of view of the activated planet, Angles also act as lights, but only have an orb of 2°. All are involved in increasing the influence of planets. Planets in sets with lights are “lighted” by them. Planets without lights, unless on Angles are relatively weak in expression until they receive a light or become Angular--usually through progressions (but can also occur through transits and, importantly, through synastry.)

In all my papers (1) the "harmonic chart for the 10th house" is also called "the 10th chart;" the "harmonic chart for the 5th house is also called the "5th chart," and so on for each of the 12 charts. And (2) I have followed the adopted convention of writing the harmonic as the same number as the chart it creates. So, pb5 mars indicates "progressed birth harmonic mars for the 5th chart." This is done to keep reading less confusing. It should be kept in mind--as discussed in the method paper--that the harmonic used to create each chart is always +2 more than the named chart. Thus, the 9th harmonic is used to create the 7th chart; the 5th harmonic to create the 3rd chart, and so on, as was originally shown to me many years ago by an example from an Indian navamsa (meaning 9) chart. That individual used the 9th harmonic to create the 7th chart.

Abbreviations used are: b=birth, c=conception, p= progressed, and t=transiting. A number following any of them, for instance, b7 saturn, identifies birth harmonic saturn for the 7th chart.

In addition, in the text, in this paper only, I use color to highlight changes in discussion from one chart to another. This is simply to alert the reader to a switch, for instance, from discussion of the 1st chart to discussion of the 7th chart. The colors used are the 1st, 3rd,4th, 7th, and 10th charts, but they do not need to be remembered. They are simply signals that a change has occurred.

We want to start with the first question, why was Kaczynski so anti-establishment, so anti-technology? Part of the answer to that involves the set including his birth Ascendant (B Asc). It occurs in his shell chart. The shell chart is the same in all twelve harmonic charts because it contains only birth and conception planets before their harmonics are added. Anything in the shell chart is quite strong because it occurs in all twelve charts. At the same time, it is developed differently (and sometimes not at all) in each of the harmonic charts.

The above set shows a conjunction of sun, saturn, and uranus (2) to B Asc. Since this set contains no harmonics, it exists in all charts. Kaczynski projects (Asc) as bright (he skipped two grades in school, was a National Merit finalist, and was accepted at Harvard with scholarship at age 16), independent and innovative (uranus Angular and ruling a 3rd house) and as a law unto himself (sun/Asc and uranus/Asc). B saturn is Angular, but it is less a problem than it could have been because it is moving away from B Asc. C saturn, which starts out (3 Taurus 57) below B Asc, turns retrograde before conjuncting it. So neither saturn hits his Ascendant through progression.

(1) Sun in the 1st house occurs more for first-born than later siblings. It indicates the greater attention a firstborn usually receives. As a child, his sun (essence) “shines” in childhood (1st house) because he is a novelty to his parents and usually very wanted. The frequent center of attention, he grows up accustomed to having others look at him. Looking at and pondering others doesn't even enter his world until the next sibling is born. So, this placement of the sun causes certain problems in marriage. The man is often considered “selfish” by his spouse. He is really a naively self-involved “star” because that is what he was "taught." Some one with the sun in the opposite house, the 7th, completes his being through relationship (7th). He puts considerable time and energy into thinking about important others (7th).

I should add the above is about sun in the 1st house. Sun actually conjunct the Ascendant (Kaczynski’s is 1° away) also has the above reading, but it is more problematic. In this method, when an individual dies, or important others die, one of the astrological indicators is a progressed sun/Angle. I suppose it is astrology’s way of saying that when a man dies, or when some one he loves dies, he becomes more essential (sun/Angle). That kind of essentiality, however, is perhaps not the best for superficial living.

With the set’s influence through b uranus over b 11th house, it shows Kaczynski wants to belong (saturn) to groups, but he also wants to be independent (uranus), or at least an innovative leader (uranus).

(2) Saturn and uranus forefront in the 1st chart and 3rd chart represent manic depression. This set belongs to all charts. The set influences his c 3rd house through c uranus, so it affects his thinking. He is not, however, manic depressive because the set contains no 1st and 3rd harmonics. Saturn and uranus in a set together describe an individual who has conflict between the old (saturn) and the new (uranus), the conservative (saturn) and the radical (uranus), tradition (saturn) and innovation (uranus), austerity (saturn) and profligacy, and deep (saturn) and inventive (uranus) thinking. Those more strongly under saturn’s influence would be deferential and cautious; those under uranus’, imperious and imprudent. Kaczynski certainly had some of those conflicts. Ironically, the weight of his allegiances was toward saturn (conservation, anti-progress, anti-technology), but by his anarchistic methods in advocating radical change from the status quo ( even a return to an older status quo), he was using and serving uranus.

Sun conjunct saturn makes Kaczynski shy because he is always aware of (sun lights) his deficiencies (saturn). (This set, however, is not the source of his extreme reticence--read about that in his 7th chart). Sun conjunct uranus makes him autocratic. Autocratic works a little better socially than shyness, so that is the quality he played up.

Saturn always introduces a little depth and sobriety, some failure, and some “pause for thought” into an otherwise benefic set. Without his other astrological problems, this set could have functioned positively to yield an individual who works well with what is (saturn) in order to change it (uranus) for the better.

Sun rules his b 5th house. Conjunct his B Asc it means sexuality, or interest in it, developed early in Kaczynski. We know from information about his life, he had little, if any, sexual experience even as an adult.

Several charts add harmonics to this set.

His 11th chart (groups/perhaps attitude toward humanity) puts c11 mars at 7 Aquarius 39, giving Kaczynski Angle/sun/mars/saturn/uranus. With mars and saturn on Angles, it is a seriously afflicted chart. Even if he would like to belong, he cannot because being in groups causes him even more pain than usual (Angle/mars/saturn).

His 1st chart (early identity, certain accidents and physical problems) has c1 neptune at 6 Taurus 31 conjunct Asc/sun/uranus/saturn.

His 10 chart puts a node conjunct it, which I discuss under 10th chart, below.

The harmonic addition to this set in his 1st chart is neptune, shown and discussed next.

At the age of nine months (February 1943), Kaczynski was hospitalized for hives. At that time hospital policy prohibited parents seeing their sick children except for one visit per week. According to Robert Graysmith, author of The Unabomber, during that time Ted was not held or comforted. He was pinned down with splints, spread-eagle and naked, to a hospital bed. The restraints kept (him) from touching his ointments or disarranging the compresses. A hospital photo showed him as “helpless, little hands clinched, and so terrified his eyes crossed.” (p. 51, The Unabomber, cited below. All numbers in parenthesis at the end of quotes refer to pages in that book.)

According to his mother, Wanda, that was when Ted changed. Before his hospitalization he was a “perfectly normal” infant, bouncing around, nuzzling, gurgling, and talking. After that, he was “slumped over--completely limp.”(51)

The Unabomber notes further that in the third-person diary Wanda kept of her first-born she wrote: :

“Feb. 27, 1943. Mother went to visit baby.... Mother felt very sad about baby. She says he is quite subdued, has lost his verve and aggressiveness and has developed an institutionalized look.”

Whenever she returned, he refused to look at her. “It wasn’t that happy, bouncing, joyous baby, but a little rag doll that didn’t look at me,” she said. Once her baby was home she noted a perceptible personality change.

“March 12, 1943. Baby home from hospital and is healthy but quite unresponsive after his experience. Hope his sudden removal to hospital and consequent unhappiness will not harm him.”

She characterized him as “flat,” listless, cold, considerably less trusting than before, and “like a bundle of clothes.” Though she cajoled, rocked, sang, and cooed, he lay unresponsive to her caresses. Wanda marked that experience as setting in stone her son’s lifelong pattern of withdrawal--”Always apart, aloof, alone,” she said.

In nursery school at age three, the teacher commented about Kaczynski: “He has very strong ideas as to what he wants to do and how he wants to do it. He will not play with other children. He will play beside them, but does not want them interfering in anything he is doing.”

The boy was always going upstairs, closing his door, and being alone....Worse, when they thought about it, no one could ever recall the child smiling. (All of the above quotes from pp. 51-52)

The only time given for Kaczynski’s hospitalization was “age 9 months.” I used February 22, 1943, exactly nine months after his birth. At that time he had progressed B Asc at 6 Taurus 22, closely conjuncting his b sun (6 Taurus 46), c uranus (6 Taurus 13) and b uranus (6 Taurus 30). It occurred in all charts.

In his 1st chart it was also conjunct c1 neptune (/sun/uranus) at 6 Taurus 31. On that date transiting uranus was at 6 Taurus 44. Transiting uranus often plays a part in precipitating events poised to happen. Here it may have triggered (uranus) Kaczynski’s hives (neptune/Angle/1st chart).

In his 10th chart, it was also conjunct his b10 South Node at 6 Taurus 32 (conjunct sun/uranus). This is interpreted under his 10th chart, below. Something negative (SN) occurred between him and his mother (10th chart), some negative pattern (SN) was put in place.

Kaczynski has another, 7th chart set, which matured during his hospitalization. It is shown below under the “7th chart” subheading. (See “Partial Harmonic Chart for the 7th House”, set (b).)

I have already discussed the set involving his B Asc. There are two more for his 1st chart.

(Set 1) His c1 moon is at 11 Pisces 12 in a set all by itself. It co-rules c 8th house (30 of 41°) and is in b 11th/c 3rd house. Moon is Pisces is always hard because it fosters dissociation and sense of being lost. When it is harmonic in a harmonic chart, it is specific to that chart. In Kaczynski’s 1st chart it implies an early (1st chart) confusion (Pisces) about and inability to comprehend (3rd house) individuals in groups (11th)--his potential playmates. The 8th influence likely added to his confusion, making it difficult if not impossible for him to separate himself out from what he did share with others when he manages to hang around. This moon plays a part in the timing (considered in the Appendix) for Kaczynski’s bombs.

(Set 2) His b1 venus at 12 Capricorn 18 is conjunct B MC at 11 Capricorn 52. Combined with his Taurus Asc/sun, they sponsors his artisanship (venus/Capricorn) and some of the sensuality (venus/Taurus) he put into woodworking the boxes he used for his bombs. In the 7th chart it, a forefront venus like this (along with its influence to a 3rd house) would have made him an artist. Here it indicates some artistic ability, but it is used for his personal (1st chart) satisfaction.

We want next to consider Kaczynski’s 3rd chart (mind). It is worth wondering, are murderers sane? What about Kaczynski? Did he understand the nature of his homicidal acts?

Of course, he also has Angle/moon/pluto. We know that Angle/light/saturn/pluto in the 3rd chart is self-referencing, autistic. I am not sure how it interprets without saturn. Possibly, it contributes to his mood swings because of narrow focus (pluto). Conversely, it would further explain his inability to consider (“feel”) others. Along the same vein, it might sponsor his obsessiveness. Quite likely it makes spontaneous communication nearly impossible because pluto turns us back upon ourselves.

B3 jupiter at 9 Libra 10 is also in this set. We saw before that mercury in a schizophrenic set mitigates against schizophrenia. It is likely that any planet of personality (mercury, venus, mars, jupiter) in the set does so. Kaczynski’ jupiter is unfortunate in Libra. Jupiter sponsors growth and expansion. In Libra, it would sponsor growth and expansion through intellectual and verbal (3rd chart) interactions with others (7th sign, Libra). Kaczynski was unable to have anything but the most meager of relationships. Once he got to Montana he seldom saw people, but even before that, he saw them, but rarely interacted with them. He did not marry. He did not date. He did not even have male friends. Unable to give meaningful expression to his jupiter in Libra--use it--because of his severely afflicted 7th chart, he was driven back upon the rest of the set--Angle/moon/neptune/pluto, withdrawn and schizoid. This is a forefront set--it has to express (be experienced).

In evaluating schizophrenia, we must also look at the 1st chart. Added Angle/saturn can give the individual a flat affect. His affect is flat because extra--harmonic--saturn strongly curtails, that is, flattens his identity. Some times a confused 1st chart figures in schizophrenia. This happened with John Hinckley, Jr. His 1st chart contained insoluble conflicts relative to his growth. Perhaps it prevented his growth. I suppose it doesn’t matter which comes first, the chicken or the egg. If he does not know who he is, how can he possibly think straight?

Kaczynski has (non-harmonic) saturn and neptune conjunct B Asc (discussed above) in his 1st chart. They influence c 3rd house through their conjunction to its ruler, c uranus. But except for neptune (inclining more to allergy than mental illness), this Asc set is an all-charts one. It is not specific to his 1st chart or the identity (early childhood) described by it. Saturn/neptune might foster what used to be called neurasthenia, an immoderate sensitivity, but that is not schizophrenia. His 1st chart, however, also has added harmonic saturn to a previously benefic Angle (shown as set 3 in his partial 1st chart, above):

The above set has a strong resemblance to John Forbes Nash’s 1st chart during the time Nash was schizophrenic. In Nash’s case, he was born with C Asc conjunct c1 jupiter. Slow secondary progression of saturn over it coincided with his schizophrenia getting much worse. It constricted and limited (saturn) his identity (1st chart) while at the same time providing the new Angle/saturn that completed siege conditions in his 3rd chart.

Kaczynski’s 1st chart saturn was already in place when he was born. His identity was already weakened (saturn on two Angles).

Sticking with this 1st chart the question could be, how did Kaczynski do as well as he did? After all, he finished graduate school.

Like Nash, Kaczynski had some strength in his 3rd houses within the chart . His b 3rd house is ruled by mercury, which is in a set with node/venus. Its harmonic is in a set with node/moon/venus. His c 3rd house, ruled by uranus, has c uranus on B Asc, already discussed. Its harmonic is in a set with--again--sun/saturn, but also jupiter. B 3rd house contains a mars, but it is not lighted, so not potent, and moreover, it is in Gemini, an active, intellectualizing placement of mars. These are all concrete problems any of us might have without them abetting psychosis.

Kaczynski’s c 3rd house within this 1st chart contains the difficult condition. It has c1 moon at 11 Pisces 12 (shown as set 1 in the 1st chart, above). It is not a forefront influence (co-rules c 8th house). But when his “consciousness is there”--it is his 3rd house, so in some way a mental influence even in his 1st chart--his identity is especially weak. If at the same time an Angle has progressed to his B MC/moon/neptune in his 3rd chart (doubling that influence), or just neptune, it favors schizophrenia. His then forefront c1 moon in Pisces diminishes (through dissociation) the identity (1st chart) with which he might fight against his mental disintegration (3rd chart).

This is especially true if his already schizoid 3rd chart has simultaneously acquired forefront affliction from mars or saturn. That is exactly what happened when he initiated his 1st explosive attack on May 25, 1978. Kaczynski’s 3rd chart picked up a new Angle/saturn. (The astrology for both charts is in the Appendix. by chart and date.)

The appraisal of his 3rd chart, then, is that Kaczynski was schizoid--in and out of greater and lesser degrees of schizophrenia. As with other schizophrenics, his weakened identity played a strong role in his illness.

But...a prison psychiatrist diagnosed Kaczynski as paranoid schizophrenic. Where is the forefront mars influence needed to convert schizophrenia into paranoid schizophrenia?

(1) Well, c mars at 25 Pisces 58 (ruler of C Asc), is lighted by c3 NN at 26 Sagittarius 17, making it forefront. That’s one.

(2) added to (1) gives him two lighted, forefront mars influences without either influencing a 3rd house within the chart. They are not as paranoid as is mars in the same set as light/neptune, but they contribute.

Kaczynski was arrested on April 3, 1996. His progressed C Asc was at 8 Scorpio 57, bringing forefront his moon/mars/saturn in (2) above. Progressed b3 saturn was at 11 Cancer 55, putting a great deal of stress on his schizoid B MC, and giving him the new saturn/Angle usually seen with schizophrenic episodes. He also had the following interesting progressions :

He was born with his c3 node at 26 Gemini/Sagittarius. It extends the upper orb of influence of his progressing b3 SN to c mars. Progressing c mars starts being lighted by c3 nodes even before 1991, then, as it leaves them behind, is lighted by progressing b3 SN, resulting in years of increased intensity of influence of his c mars (ruler of C Asc).

Mars in Pisces, like the moon, is difficult. Conjunct a south node it can be unpleasant to the point of paranoiac (but it does not sponsor what we know as paranoia or paranoid schizophrenia). The individual feels small and helpless (Pisces), sometimes almost literally paralyzed (the indecisiveness of mars in Pisces), a pawn among malevolent kings.

Together, these produced the mental conditions we know as paranoid schizophrenia. So, when (likely--I do not have a date, only “post-arrest” ) the psychiatrist interviewed him, Kaczynski was a paranoid schizophrenic. But, notwithstanding his shyness (that is, his developmental disability) and his fear of restraints, he wasn't always that paranoid.

In the title I stated that Ted Kaczynski was “more than schizophrenic.” Let’s move on to his 7th chart, the chart the best shows our identity as we usually think of it. It actually shows the identity that results through our interaction with others, but that is principally how we know ourselves. Imagine no reflection of yourself through others starting from the time you are born and you can see why the 7th chart is paramount. It is the most over-all informative chart of this method.

”No Trespassing”--the Kaczynski Cabin in Montana

Continuing with the Pisces part of set (1), it is in c 4th/b 12th houses, implying he will be experiencing it even more in his later years (4th), and it could be through bitter (12th) realization. It influences the same house already discussed in the preceding paragraph. Because it is lighted by his Gemini moon, it is active most of the time. It shows his self projection (mars) is reserved, shy and uncertain (Pisces). This is compounded by his venus in Pisces, which shows the feminine part of his nature as also shy. His feelings toward women (venus) are tender (Pisces). In relations with them he wants their whole heart (venus in Pisces/12th), which could make it harder for him to let them have separate identities. Any woman who provides a light, but especially a moon, for a conjunction to this puts Kaczynski in a quandary. It creates powerful attraction, but it also exposes all his uncertainty. He could easily feel used or victimized by her, believing she encouraged (his venus/mars unwittingly acquired her moon, i.e., got lighted) him.

Because b venus rules B Asc and c mars rules C Asc, this whole set is doubly forefront.

As indicated also by his b sun, ruler of b 5th house, being conjunct his B Asc, Kaczynski showed an early and keen interest in sexuality. Perhaps he was even sexually molested (more on that below). More likely, it was early, inappropriate stimulation, and very, very confusing. However it occurred, it is possible the perpetrator was unaware of his or her effect.

Set (1) shows a man who is an active (forefront) pursuer of relationships with many women (moon in 7th) and/or the public (moon in 7th)--intellectually (3rd) and sexually (5th)! Surely he would have suffered until he found the right woman, but he would have had to keep trying. How could he have turned out to be so different?

He turned out so different because he did not get a chance to go through the active, if painful, learning process set (1) implies. He never learned to manage his shyness and confusion. He never succeeded in love because of set (2). Set (2) shows Angle/moon/saturn/pluto. It is the same significator set autistic children have forefront in their 1st and 3rd charts . In the 7th chart it allows more development of personality. The 7th chart, in a sense, does not start functioning until the child has an identity with which he interacts with others. He has, at least, separated his identity from that of his major caretaker, usually his mother. The 1st chart starts functioning at birth (maybe even at conception). So, an autistic set in the 1st/3rd charts prevents development of personality. But, an autistic set in the 7th chart allows enough personality to develop so that, when grown, the individual appears a fully functioning adult. It is actually quite close to the 7th chart significator for Asperger's Syndrome. See the paper I later wrote on one individual with this problem-- Paper on Woman With Asperger's Syndrome. May 2012: On review, it turns out Kaczynski has two "autistic sets" in his 7th chart. In fact the second one, which I missed earlier, has all the same specifications as does the set in the 7th chart of the individual diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome. I have put this material below, in Footnote 5. Unlike most autistic children, Kaczynski can go the bank, dress himself, plan his day, finish school, get a PhD, and so on. But, in the 7th chart the set prevents what does develop from interacting with others. If he cannot interact with them, he cannot learn from them. Without mutual exchange he cannot establish the appropriateness of his behavior. If he does not know what is right and what is wrong, or better, what works and what does not, he cannot correct his actions. His behavior never becomes suited to his situation or his needs.

Put in the form of an imaginary quest for getting into the other fellow's moccasins for a minute, it goes as follows...

Imagine: You came to this planet as a seed. You went through an immense amount of work to develop and run a body, to develop interests and skills, and to acquire a personality (you thought). Now you are ready for what can be the best bit--experiencing what you have developed with and through others. You will experience the pain of being wrong, the joy of doing it just right, and the satisfaction of sharing rites of passage with your age peers. You, however, discover fairly early that you are completely out of sync with your peers. Something is happening with them that is not happening with you. Never mind. You think they are silly and superficial, sometimes even stupid. Not like you.

As time goes on, however, you start to realize an enormous cost is attached to being the way you are. Since you do not really know what to do about it, you are going to do what almost all of us do (unless some one wise stops us) when confronted with our gaping shortcomings. You are going to try to extricate yourself from your perilous condition by putting all your emphasis on your good qualities, the areas you excel in. When you are Ted Kaczynski, you are going to go even further into your mind. And that...you don’t know this yet...is going to isolate you even more.

As you get older, you begin to realize your long-term “last ditch” emphasis--your Ph.D., for instance--did not, will never lead you to normality. It will never lead you to a loving relationship, to a wife, to children, to sexual satisfaction. You start looking for explanations. After all, are you not human? Well, yes, you are. You have the roots of all the same longings, desires, and needs as other people. But yours are, in a sense, primitive. Why? Because you never had the chance to refine them through experience. You never learned to guffaw, to chuckle, to wince with embarrassment. To hit back. All you ever did was close up. Your self never had a chance to actively compare with and correct through other selves.

That is what happened to Ted Kaczynski. From the age of nine months he stewed in a kind of isolation tank. Its endless isolation contributed substantially to the flowering of his bouts of schizophrenia.

We want to look at what was going on in this chart when Kaczynski was hospitalized at age nine months.

Set (2) “matured” on February 22, 1943 when Kaczynski was hospitalized. Progressed b7 saturn was at 11 Cancer 21 (coming from 10 Cancer 29 at birth) in much closer opposition to B MC, which it ruled, at 11 Capricorn 52, with transiting pluto at 11 Cancer 35. (Suggesting the possibility that B MC is actually between 11 Capricorn 20 and 11 Capricorn 40.)

I agree with Wanda Kaczynski--his hospitalization was when Ted’s “personality” changed for the worse. Because of that experience--symbolized by an astrology which portrayed it--he remained locked into deep, pre-mental fear and mistrust of others. On that date his door to relationship was sealed hermetically. But I do not agree with her completely. He had other problems, problems without which he might have made it out of isolation (see 10th chart, below).

I sympathize with readers who now splutter indignantly, ”but, after all, many of us were hospitalized (dropped, traumatized, battered, neglected, tromped on, and so on) as children. We do not turn into Ted Kaczynski’s.” We do not turn into Teds because we do not have Ted’s set (2) in our 7th chart.

So, in his 7th chart we see a tender, bubbly, communicative Kaczynski (set 1, described by mother before hospitalization, above) and a Kaczynski who sits immersed in a tiny isolation tank--“slumped over--completely limp” (set 2, described by mother after hospitalization, above). Thereafter he remained terrified of existence outside that tank. Better not to look (mother’s description after hospitalization--making no eye contact, an autistic trait, set 2).

Of course, Angle/moon/saturn (see paper on Vivienne) can represent a rejecting (saturn) mother (moon). Addition of pluto, I think, makes it more severe. Did Kaczynski’s “rejection” consist of the one terrifying hospital experience which he thereafter projected as his reality? (Does this also happen with autistic children, possibly even in the womb?) Or did Wanda reject him throughout his childhood? Was she, for instance, overwhelmed with guilt about his hospital experience, then, perhaps unconsciously, rejecting?

We are still working with the 7th chart. Returning to set (1), what happens when all that outreach (Gemini/3rd/7th)--Kaczynski’s positive force of expression--is, in fact, found beside the point? It starts narrowing down. It becomes just intellectual brilliance. Later, its becomes more arcane. It addresses itself to imaginative relationships, and imaginative (and sometimes real) wrongs. As a forefront set it has to express, so, finally, it, too, becomes the negative, inverted expression of its possibilities. In Kaczynski’s case...

he still writes a lot (moon in Gemini/3rd)--some letters (some deadly) but it is mostly in journals, including painstakingly kept journals of his experience perfecting his bombs.

he sends explosive (mars/uranus) devices through the mail (Gemini/3rd house)

Sometimes he does not mail his bombs, but places them as an innocuous looking, curiosity-provoking package in the familiar environment (3rd) of others (7th).

he is still a would-be lover, but has become the victim (mars in Pisces).of his own unexpressed (12th/Pisces) tender feelings (venus/Pisces) which have turned into hate.

eventually his whole house of cards collapses (4th/12th). He is left--all those lives he hurt did not help him as he believed--with the bitter feeling of victimization (mars in Pises/4th).

In reading The Unabomber, it does not take a psychiatrist or psychologist to understand that Kaczynski’s fight for “wild” nature (p. 357 of the text, taken by Graysmith from Kaczynski’s Manifesto) versus technology was a symbolic fight for his father (the socialistic, left-leaning, blue collar, environmentalist), or perhaps essential manhood versus his mother (the intellectual schoolteacher-mother who read to him from, among other things, the Scientific American when he was in first grade). (50) (footnote 1)

In the book, Kaczynski’s father appears gentle, if passive. An old style socialist intellectual, in his son’s story (as told by Graysmith) he recedes into the background. His mother, on the other hand, is prominent. True, his father is deceased by the time Ted is arrested, but I have the feeling he would have receded into the background even if he had been alive. His mother had the most influence on Ted’s early years.

Let’s look first at his 4th chart (father’s influence).

Set (1) shows C Asc opposition c jupiter. Jupiter conjunct the 7th cusp usually means good (jupiter) relations with others (7th cusp). And help (jupiter) from them (7th). But here it is joined by harmonic c4 saturn, indicating that what started out with positive potential (Asc/jupiter) was cut off (saturn), or at least diminished. Note the similarity of this set with its counterpart in the 1st chart. There, harmonic saturn was derived from b saturn. Here it is derived from c saturn. They might be pointing to the same problem--as a child his father failed, in relation to his mother, in demonstrating a viable male model. (more below).

Set (2) is important because it gives Kaczynski a lighted mars in Pisces in his 4th chart. I have already written a lot about mars in Pisces. In this chart it is not forefront because none of the three planets involved rules an Angle. It does, however, come into play by progression for the bombings (see Appendix).

Just looking at these sets--without even looking at the positive ones--they show Kaczynski father a decent influence. He is occasionally autocratic [uranus conjunct sun in 2]. Sometimes he makes his son feel helpless (non-forefront lighted mars in Pisces). He inspires (Angle/jupiter), corrects (Angle/saturn), and maybe "abandons," especially to his wife, or does his fatherly duties by rote (saturn).

While we are on Kaczynski’s 4th chart, we should examine it for progressions for his hospitalization around February 22, 1943. It contains two important, difficult progressions. Both involve C MC.

(1) Progressed b4 mars is at 15 Pisces 19, beginning to oppose his C MC (/saturn/jupiter) at 15 Virgo 48.

(2) Progressed C MC is at 17 Virgo 16, squaring b4 saturn at 16 Gemini 59 (or squaring pb4 saturn at 17 Gemini 34, or squaring their midpoint at 17 Gemini 17).

Kaczynski’s 4th chart shows--as was the case with Vivienne when her parents left her with a baby-sitter while they went to Europe for six weeks--severe progressed affliction, that is, new mars and saturn on Angles. Angle/saturn/neptune can be rendered as a sense of deflation (the neptune causes the inflation, the saturn destroys it), generally experienced by all of us as a feeling the ground we are on, once considered solid, is actually quite shaky. Depending on how long it lasts and how global it is, that can be very devastating for a very young child.

We have already seen some of his mother’s influence on Kaczynski through signs and aspects to his moons. We want to look at her influence as it shown by his 10th chart.

Set (1) in Kaczynski’s 10th chart includes moon in Pisces conjunct mars in Pisces. Both are harmonic, so specific to this chart. In turn, they are in the set with neptune. Both represent pain--the moon more because of dissociation, and mars, more because of feelings of confusion and powerlessness. Mars rules C Asc (in b 7th house), so this set is forefront. Moon rules b 4th and co-rules b 3rd (21 of 41°) houses, so this set affects his thinking (3rd) and his experiences at home (4th). Moreover, the Pisces part is in c 3rd house. It also suggests the possibility--through the 10th chart and the socialization his mother taught him--he will finally (4th) experience deep sorrow (moon in Pisces).(Compare the 3rd/4th moon in Pisces influences of Nietzsche and Nijinsky).

Moon/mars/neptune in a 3rd chart, forefront and influencing a 3rd house indicates paranoid schizophrenia. What does it mean in a 10th chart? It indicates a type of relationship with the mother which I believe unconsciously indicated in Kaczynski’s own words (in italics to differentiate them from my comments, which follow each):

“By ‘freedom’ we mean the opportunity to go through the power process, with real goals...and without interference, manipulation or supervision from anyone, especially from any large organization.” (Unabomber Manifesto)(p.15 general text)

Establishing the identity of mother = technological society, the above states he never had the opportunity to go through the power process with her--that, as the “large organization” she interfered, manipulated, and supervised. This is also an excellent expression of his experience of mars in Pisces through her.

An index exists for how little he felt listened to, how little his voice mattered. He ultimately took The New York Times, The New York Post, and the whole country hostage so he could get his Manifesto published. When it was, in his 7th chart one of the sets he had was progressed c7 saturn at 6 Gemini 10 R, and progressed c7 mars at 6 Gemini 20 R. They were conjunct his b7 venus (love of) in 6 Gemini 54 (learning, writing). The light for it came from his 40-day return, which had its harmonic North Node at 6 Pisces 57. I think it means when he saw his Manifesto in print, he became devastatingly aware just how far off base he had gone.

And why was the industrial revolution a disaster? Organized modern society, the Unabomber tells us, “HAS to force people to behave in ways that are increasingly remote from the natural pattern of human behavior.” (357)

She forced him to become less and less natural. She could not help it, it was in her nature.

Technology, he said, made the situation worse by “permanently reducing human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine.” (357)

Unconsciously mostly, he feels that by the time she finished with him, he was a mere cog in a social machine. (Actually, he wasn’t even that. He was a mere cog outside the social machine.)

”The positive idea that we propose is nature. That is WILD nature.”

Kaczynski wants to restore his self to what he was before “socialization,” i.e., his upbringing. He wants to find his life and make it his. Not hers, or theirs, or even society’s.

The above all relate to moon/mars/3rd (he was forced to be intellectual rather than natural) in Pisces in the 10th chart. All the quotes were taken from the text of the biography about Kaczynski and in turn were quotes from Kaczynski’s Manifesto. I did not read the Manifesto.

Set (2) shows harmonic c10 sun in Pisces providing a light for his venus conjunction mars in Pisces. This, his 3rd chart, and his 7th chart are the only ones which provide lights for this conjunction. Since c mars rules C Asc, when lighted this original conjunction of venus/mars, which is normally background, becomes a forefront set influencing both C Asc (ruled by mars) and B Asc (ruled by venus). It also influences his b 7th house, because C Asc is in his b 7th house. What does it mean? I will give one interpretation. I am sure there are other possible ones. Kaczynski’s earliest experiences of his sexuality came first through his mother. I am NOT saying she sexually molested him. I am not even implying she did anything sexual with him. It occurs so early, it is hard to even guess what happened. The Unabomber notes that Wanda held Ted on her lap while reading to him (footnote 1, at bottom). Everything depends on what was happening in his mind and feelings at those times. Kaczynski’s c mars (conjunct venus) in Pisces rules his c 5th house. Also ruling his C Asc, lighted in the 10th chart, it suggests a strong link between his mother and his inhibited (Pisces) or repressed (Pisces) or confused (Pisces) sexuality.

At the very least it means his mother (10th chart) was the individual he could least assert himself with because both Ascendants and one 7th house (C Asc in b 7th) are influenced by his lighted mars in Pisces.

On the other hand, evidence exists in this chart that his mother was an “important other” to Ted. His b10 jupiter (not shown) is at 22 Taurus 00, conjunct his conception Descendant (and his c jupiter at 22 Taurus 35). It is in the same spot that Ted’s 4th chart puts c4 saturn. She related to him (jupiter/Desc) and tried to help (same). Maybe for him all that does is draw him into the relationship so the damage can be done by his much more influential mars in Pisces sets. I think it does show her intention was quite benevolent (angular jupiter/10th chart).

Set (3) Further support for an unhealthy sensuality between Kaczynski and his mother is his b10 South Node at 6 Taurus 32. It is conjunct his all-charts B Asc/sun/uranus/uranus/saturn. Sun rules b 5th house. Some possible interpretations are: (a) His mother brought out Ted’s sensuality (Taurus) without realizing it and it negatively affected him. After she brought him home from the hospital, “though she cajoled, rocked, sang, and cooed, he lay unresponsive to her caresses.”(52) Maybe that was it. Maybe she over-stimulated him when what he needed was something else. Maybe then what he needed most was her quiet, persevering presence--a Being who was willing to find out where he was, what he wanted, not how she wanted him to be--more like Ellie's Mom Paper About Autism. (b) She encouraged his focus on himself as center of attention (sun/Asc) with negative consequences (SN). (c) She brought out his fight between tradition/convention (saturn) and self-as-autocrat (uranus) in a negative way (SN). (d) Since saturn stands for "not," and Taurus for “have,” on his Asc it puts a strong emphasis on Kaczynski “not having.” For his Taurus sun that introduces a fundamental problem in being (sun). Uranus there does not help because it introduces erratic or breaking up (uranus) having. There must be more.

Remember his progressed B Asc was conjunct his b sun/uranus at age 9 months when Ted was hospitalized? At the same time, it was conjunct this b10 SN. It represents the initiation of some pattern with his mother. I mentioned some above. Another might be she treated him like her possession (Taurus) if for no other reason that he had stopped acting like the sweet infant she had been used to.

Our South Nodes indicate consciousness we are already steeped in. The North Nodes indicate the point of compensation, or movement away from ruts, bad habits, and over-development. Effective parents, teachers, mentors, and even friends are those who help us to find North Node behavior. Whatever that activity is, we usually love it, and usually get approval for doing it.

While examining Kaczynski’s 10th chart, we should look at progressions for his hospitalization around February 22, 1943. It contains two important, difficult progressions:

Set (a) influences B MC as well as B Asc, giving him a new double Angle/saturn influence.

As was the case in his 4th chart (father’s influence), his 10th (mother’s influence) has acquired new mars and saturn to Angles, and is seriously afflicted, demonstrating maximum dissonance. When we have progressed mars and saturn on Angles we can't do anything right--here Ted's experience of his mother.

Timing
When I started working on Kaczynski’s astrology, I was curious which charts showed the timing for his bombs. Predominant ones would indicate areas which upset him the most.

I assumed his aggression was based on anger. His anger may have followed disappointment or feelings of failure or an acute, unsatisfied wish for relationship. For my purpose, the exact description of the latter does not matter. Something made him angry. Aggression-sponsored anger is correlated with mars.

I looked for progressed mars/Angle or mars becoming newly forefront through rulership in each chart I examined.

A useful question would be, does new Angle/mars in charts always indicate anger? Not at all. Many people are hardly ever angry. We all experience forefront mars through progressions. So, individuals who never get angry must experience their mars some way other than anger. Mars forefront can be an accident, or injury, or surgery, or extra physical activity, or annoyance with....it goes on. Sometimes it does not even express in any recognizable way! On the other hand, anger is usually represented by mars, or moon in Scorpio, or thwarted Aries lights, the latter all mars-ruled.

Although any one can be angry, excessive, unmanageable anger usually occurs when the individual starts out, before progressions, with a problem. Astrologically, it can take many forms. When he starts out, for instance, with an ineffectual mars, his progressed forefront mars tip the scales, giving him more frustration and failure than he can handle.

Mars energy is correlated with aggression and self-assertion. Appropriate self assertion is a measure of one’s ability to take care of one’s self., and a component of our self respect as well as our self-confidence. Ineffectual mars implies lack in these areas.

The house mars is in and the ones it rules make a difference. For instance, mars in the 12th is in the house naturally ruled by Pisces, so it shares many of the faults of a Pisces mars. The individual’s self-assertion (mars) is often ineffectual (12th, bondage) relative to his needs. Mars ruling the 12th house refers mars’ results (behavioral outcomes) to the 12th house. In the latter case the individual could be functioning well, but accumulating surprising (12th), often not pleasant, results (12th).

The sign mars is in is also important. Mars (the “red planet”) is a fiery planet connected to the outreaching part of our desire nature. When it is in water signs (Cancer, Scorpio, Pisces) it curbs and confuses self-assertion because water signs focus the individual more on feeling than doing. Effective action is action done in the present. Often, by the time the individual with mars in water signs figures out what to do, he is working on the past.

A lifetime of such ineffectual action--failure, especially in an area of life important to the individual--can result in an abundance of frustration that turns to anger.

Adults who have effective mars (not too afflicted so that desire, action, and result are related) have self-confidence based on having already, most of their lives, successfully negotiated numerous new skills and conditions. That gives them confidence for the present and future. Those past successes also make them more intent on behaving suitably in the present. These two differences give them patience.

What if you are an adult without that repository of self-success? What if you never, or hardly ever, did it right? What if you never built up self-confidence? What if you had, relative to your own past accomplishments, nothing to lose?

Charts that suggest the individual starts out, before progressions, feeling helpless or ineffectual are especially susceptible to engendering anger when more mars comes forefront. They have, so to speak, a mars fault. It is just another way of saying he has problems following through with asserting himself.

Kaczynski’s 10th chart starts out with two mars in Pisces forefront; his 3rd and 7th charts, with one. They were my prime suspects for his ongoing, overt aggression toward others.

Kaczynski’s 7th chart contains mars in Gemini, discussed above, in the same set with mars in Pisces. His mars in Gemini had little to do with his anger. His mars in Gemini’s worst affliction is that it is in the same set as mars in Pisces, both double-lighted. His mars in Gemini sponsors the form his anger took once it got out of hand.

The Appendix contains mars counts for all bomb dates for five charts--the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 7th, and 10th. I see targeting and counting all of them rather like flying without an altimeter above low ceiling clouds according to their contour. I should give me a reasonable estimation of the peaks and valleys in the land beneath.

Before closing this paper, I want to show just a few more progressions for Kaczynski’s charts. For the interested astrologer, they help confirm birth time.

Decided He Would Resign His Post at Berkeley
On August 1, 1968 Kaczynski told a fellow teacher he was leaving Berkeley. In his 7th chart, progressed b7 uranus was at 11 Cancer 58 opposite his B MC. He left around June 20, 1969. Progressed B MC was at 7 Aquarius 47, squaring b saturn at 7 Taurus 50, an all-charts set. His 10th chart was stronger. Progressed b10 saturn was at 15 Virgo 15, conjunct C MC at 15 Virgo 48. Progressed C Asc was at 17 Sagittarius 08, square c10 saturn at 17 Gemini 20.

Lost Years
According to Graysmith, Kaczynski disappeared from the end of 1969 to early 1971. “During 1970 he paid no taxes, had no photos of himself taken, had lost himself entirely.” (17) He resigned from Berkeley effective the summer of 1969. Graysmith found out from there he went to stay with his family. He apparently did some traveling, looking for land he and his brother could buy. British Columbia turned down his application for a homestead. January 1, 1970 places his progressed B MC at 8 Aquarius 18, aspecting his progressed b uranus at 8 Taurus 04. Transiting uranus was moving back and forth over his C MC. Angle/uranus is often a time of change, though not necessarily travel.

Father’s Death
On October 2, 1990, “Turk” Kaczynski, Ted’s father, earlier diagnosed with lung cancer, shot himself. Death of important others usually shows up in the 7th chart. Sometimes it shows up in the 10th (for father or mother). In his 7th chart Kaczynski had progressed B MC at 28 Aquarius 05, aspecting b mercury at 28 Taurus 24. Progressed B Asc was at 19 Gemini 35, conjunct pc7 mars at 20 Gemini 03 R. Progressed C Asc was at 10 Capricorn 55, aspecting his b7 saturn at 10 Cancer 29 and his c pluto at 10 Cancer 29. Altogether, he had new Angles to mercury, mars, saturn, pluto, the latter three usually being forefront in deaths, with mercury indicating this death came in the form of news (mercury). Kaczynski did not attend his father’s funeral.

Arrested, April 3, 1996
Kaczynski’s 1st and 10th charts were most important in signaling his arrest.

An all-charts set was progressed B MC at 3 Pisces 30 aspecting his b neptune (ruler of b 12th house) at 3 Virgo 14.

Another all-charts set was progressed c pluto at 11 Cancer 40 (coming from 10 Cancer 29) opposition B MC at 11 Capricorn 52.

A third all-charts set was progressed b mars (ruler of b 7th, co-ruler of b 12th) houses at 25 Cancer 24 approaching conjunction of b moon (ruler of b 4th, co-ruler of b 3rd houses) at 25 Cancer 51. This had no forefront influence, but did bespeak painful (mars) experiences (moon) ahead for him.

In his 1st chart he had progressed c1 mars (ruler of C Asc in b 7th house, and ruler of c 5th and 12th houses) at 11 Capricorn 36 conjunct B MC at 11 Capricorn 52 and opposing progressed c pluto.

After his arrest, his mars came to represent the interrogations and intense scrutiny he experienced once incarcerated.

An important set in his 10th chart was b10 South Node progressed to 10 Pisces 16, in closer conjunction to his b10 moon at 10 Pisces 09 (ruler of his b 4th house, co-ruler of b 3rd, 22 of 32°.). It was the end (4th) of his career (10th chart), and his “insanity” (moon in Pisces conjunct SN influencing 3rd) became known (10th chart). Another way to interpret it was the pain (moon conjunct mars in Pisces) he suffered in relation to his mother (10th chart) reached its unfortunate (moon in Pisces conjunct progressed SN) conclusion (4th house influence).

Conclusion
Was Theodore Kaczynski a paranoid schizophrenic? Yes, but only some of the time. Did that turn him into a serial bomber? No, it did not.

Theodore Kaczynski was troubled by more than schizophrenia. He had a serious problem in his 7th chart with his Angle/moon/saturn/pluto. An "Asperger’s" or semi-autistic set, it showed a powerful breach in his relationship with his mother, and, through her as model, to women in general, and perhaps, to the whole female side of his own nature. Women are gentle, soft.(footnote 3) Ted Kaczynski did not dare to be. When this set was activated at nine months, he was way too young for such overwhelming destruction of his human potential.

He also had a serious problem in his 10th chart, the one which contains specific information about our relationship to our mother. She did not just reject him. She overwhelmed him.

Once his Asperger's set was operating, given over-emphasis on intellect by his parents, and given his inability to have his other needs and wishes recognized by his chief caretaker, his mother, becoming head heavy was a natural progression.

He became a serial bomber because the lines of force in his chart led to that form of expression following his on-going and devastating realization that he was utterly incapable of transforming his life.

It certainly looks like Kaczynski unconsciously wanted to kill his parents, especially his mother. As was also true of Charles Whitman, Jr. (for whom it was the father--he actually did kill his mother). However, even grown children do not kill the parent who has "given them" lighted mars in Pisces. If they had been able to confront that parent about the issues so destructive to their well-being, we would not be knowing about them through their destructive explosion into social life. Unable to slay, or even correctly to identify, the dragon, and simultaneously unable to escape the dungeon, their blame goes elsewhere.

Ted was aware he was severely socially limited. As he grew older, he better understood its consequences and his disturbance grew accordingly. In a letter to his brother in the summer of 1991 he wrote of his social skills being pretty well destroyed by the time he was 20. (This age from him makes his perception of his Angle/moon/saturn/pluto one actively destroying until then. Was it actively destructive, or did he just become more aware?). “I became an outsider.” (207)

To his mother that same summer he wrote that he was always under stress in the presence of others because he could not believe they would accept him. “This fear of rejection--based on bitter experience both at home and at school--has ruined my life...” (207)

Quoting from the text of the book, he “ended his long letter to his mother by accusing her of failing to nurture his social skills, thus barring him from relating normally to people. He stated icily that he would hate her forever ‘because the harm you did me can never be undone.’” (208)

Discussion
Who was right? Were Kaczynski’s social possibilities destroyed when he was hospitalized at age nine months, as Wanda believed? Or, did his parents do him in, as Ted believed (see footnote 4)?

I have shown the astrology that set Kaczynski’s Asperger's Syndrome traits into motion when he was hospitalized. I have also shown the astrology which confirms his viewpoint that both parents, but more his mother, did him in. Or at least failed him.

Somewhere in The Unabomber it states that Mr. and Mrs. Kaczynski “doted on their two sons.” They, may, in fact have had nothing but the best of intentions. It is entirely possible that they did not know how to help Ted. In trying to lead and correct, perhaps they used methods which harmed more than they helped. For instance, in one letter (April, 1986) from Ted to his brother, David, Ted writes that:

OK, now let’s take your contention that because I was a ‘gloomy’ etc. kid, the parents had reason to believe I really was ‘sick’....Let’s go even further and assume I was a real nuthouse case--let’s suppose I went around insisting that I was Napoleon Bonaparte....Far from justifying our parents’ behavior, that makes it even worse. They certainly knew enough to realize that if someone really is mentally ill, one of the worst things you can do to them is shout at them in a hostile and accusing manner, ‘You’re sick! You’re sick! You have the mind of a two-year-old.” (67-68)

As good as Kaczynski’s parents were--and in Graysmith’s book they read like decent, loving, intelligent people--I do not think Kaczynski fabricated the above. He did not make up a mother who wrote of herself in the 3rd person, “she says he is quite subdued” in her own diary. He did not invent the mother with so strong an interest in intellect that she (he did not pick it himself) read Scientific American to her 6 year-old son.< /p>

Mr. Kaczynski died before Ted was arrested. Mrs. Kaczynski was still alive. One son had become an infamous murderer. The other son had had to turn him in. At least publicly, Mrs. Kaczynski remained innocent of any role she had, or may have had, in raising the killer. Her total innocence bothered me. But then again, maybe that was a necessarily defensive public stand, designed to avert prying eyes from an already macerated heart. Or was it, only because she was innocent, that is, ignorant, of her influence on her first-born son that she could have had just that influence?

So, did she do him in, or not? From his point of view, i.e., his chart, she did. Badly. From early on, what Kaczynski wanted desperately was the cloth mother. What he got was the wire one. From Wanda's point of view, no matter how hard she tried, she was unable to re-find the cloth baby after his hospitalization. She only found the wire one. That at least temporarily made her the wire mother. However, we see in her behavior throughout the years that she continued to be the wire mother. And so, no matter how much brilliance Ted demonstrated, it never earned him his cloth mother. His deficit starting so young, he did not need her just for comfort. He needed her for his development.

”No Admittance”--Life in Jail

Footnotes
Footnote 1
From The Unabomber: “The bookish little gentleman often perched on his mother’s lap as she read to him from Scientific American. ...At that time, he’d been in first grade.” (50)

Footnote 2
It is beginning to appear that most of the charts can represent anger.

Footnote 3
From The Unabomber: ”Women are gentle, nice, pleasant to be with, they represent warmth, joy, family life, love, and, of course, sex. Naturally, women have their faults too and moreover not all women have the good qualities I’ve just mentioned. But for 37 years I’ve desired women. I’ve wanted desperately to find a girlfriend or a wife but never have been able to make any progress toward doing so because I lack the necessary social self-confidence and social skills.” (209)

Footnote 4
From The Unabomber: “By the mid-seventies, the Professor had convinced himself that his parents were insensitive, if not cruel, to him during his formative years. He found the basis for his antisocial tendencies to be rooted here, and not in his mother’s belief that his extended hospital stay during infancy had created all the anger and pain he felt now.” (67)

Footnote 5
May 2012: Here is the material that shows Kaczynski's apparent Asperger's. It isn't quite correct to say I missed it when I wrote this paper. I wasn't looking for it because in 2003 I had no idea what Asperger's syndrome might look like.

We saw Set (1) in the discussion of Kaczynski's 7th chart above, in the body of this paper. By itself it is compelling in the specifications it provides for retracting and withdrawing from contact with others because it is in the chart especially identified as having to do with important others in our lives, the 7th. The conjunction of the saturn/pluto (lighted by B MC) on his 4th house cusp is also scary because it suggests potent "autism" (not being connected, withdrawal) during the last years of life (4th house cusp).

We saw saturn and pluto conjunct in the 4th house lighted by C Asc in the 7th chart of Amelia Earhart:

The above set shows why I think she survived the plane crash. It takes time to experience the isolation implied by saturn/pluto.

Returning to Kaczynski’s astrology, Set (2) is the one I failed to see in 2003.. Amazingly, it shows his second 7th chart Angle/saturn/pluto. This one is additionally lighted by b sun in Taurus, so very potent. C uranus rules his c 3rd house. B saturn rules B MC. So this set affects two Angles--B MC and B Asc. With it he has a 7th chart Angle/light/saturn/pluto/3rd set--the same as the Asperger's individual we have birth data on. (Link to paper at top of this page.)

Additional implications of Set (2) show the hermetic withdrawal that goes with saturn/pluto also applies to his 5th chart of sexuality (b sun rules it) and to his 11th chart of groups (b uranus rules it). He has c moon at 13 Aries 44 in c 5th house, showing an automatic (moon) and recurring (moon) spontaneous (Aries) sexual drive (5th). It would have sponsored the crudeness (Aries, sometimes) he expressed toward some women as this saturn/pluto continually deconstructed any fantasies of union and satisfaction.

Set (2) is devastating in the deprivation it introduces to Kaczynski's life.

What we do not know is whether or not there are astrological signatures which either diminish, suppress, or completely destroy the manifestation of “Asperger’s sets” like Set (2).

We know, for instance, with Alzheimer’s disease, that sun on an Angle (that is, conjunct, square or opposition it with no more than a 2° orb) which also influences the houses shown in the Alzheimer’s signature (houses 3, 4, 8 and 9) acts to suppress or deny the manifestation of Alzheimer’s disease. This makes sense because sun on an Angle shows active individual (sun) expression (Angle). Alzheimer’s destroys all individuality, so the sun set is absolutely contrary to Alzheimer’s one and suppresses or counteracts it.

A similar suppression occurred in a different chart for a different disease. It appears that Bruce Lee’s three suns on Angles in his 1st chart, the chart allergies normally occur in, suppressed his high potential for allergic reactions. He did not even know he was allergic. When progressions added additional, active significators for allergies, he took a pill and died from brain swelling. Apparently the suns were not strong enough to suppress the additional allergic significators. Here is the link to that paper: Paper of Death of Bruce Lee. Sun on an Angle in this instance appears to act through its significance as a planet demonstrating “vitality.” With three on Angles, his vitality was normally so strong he had no idea he had allergic susceptibilities.

We also showed in the second paper on Alzheimer’s, which includes a long digression on Parkinson’s Disease, that jupiter on an Angle mitigates against Parkinson’s, while saturn on an Angle pushes Parkinson’s toward Dementia Pugilistica, a disease which develops earlier and faster than Parkinson’s. For instance, Muhammad Ali suffers from Parkinson’s syndrome. He has the astrology for full Parkinson’s disease, but he also has jupiter on an Angle. Here is the link to that paper Part II, Paper on Alzheimer’s Disease

So, right now ( May 2012), we do not know if Kaczynski’s 7th chart contains some “anti-Asperger’s astrology.” He has (1) sun on an Angle (influencing a 3rd house) , shown in the partial chart above. It is actually part of his Asperger’s signature. But the Asperger’s signature only requires a light. Sun on an Angle yields a lot more information than just “light.”. Kaczynski also has (2) jupiter on an Angle, also shown in the partial chart above. C jupiter at 22 Taurus 35 is on C Desc at 23 Taurus 54, a set that occurs in all charts, so it is powerfully benefic. ( I did not consider house influence, which could make a difference.). Do either of these diminish the expression of Set (2)?

Bibliography
The Unabomber: A Desire to Kill by Robert Graysmith. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing Co., 1997.