A broken clock is right twice a day
Has good points… decides the best way to bring those points to the world is planting bombs.
Adam Lanza had some good points about autism (remember when he called into that radio show?). His subsequent expression of his feelings about the world was less than optimal. There’s no need to give the cunt kudos for his insights.
This is some “say what you like about Hitler, but at least he made the trains run on time!” level of vacuous.
I’m not saying that bombs were a good or acceptable idea, but I am saying that if it weren’t for the bombs, none of us would have read that manifesto to consider this post.
Wasn’t that Mussolini?
(Source: xkcd282)
Thanos has good points. How he dealt with the problem is the issue.
Should have doubled the resources!
Jesus I never considered that alternative
yeah, no matter their points, they still killed people. Fuck 'em.
To all the people in the comments being like “Ted had some good points.” Judi Bari, Peter Kropotkin, and Murray Bookchin are all people who have written about environmentalism and the problems of technology, industrialization, and such and better than the reactionary psychopath did. Fascists love the unabomber and use him to normalize eco-fascism. Stop fucking saying he had good points cause there are better authors who have made those same points without all the fucking reactionary and eco-fascism tied to it.
In case anyone is interested, I made some videos to help explain both Kropotkin and Bookchin:
To be clear, he was not an eco fascist, he stood against fascism. But he was en eco terrorist.
Not really enjoying this trend of everything being labelled as “fascism” these days.
Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, its a duck. I don’t really care if the duck says its not a duck and that it is against ducks, its still a duck. When you go about blaming the lefties (of which he labelled fascists as leftists) and the gays, and envisioning a society that would functionally genocide a bunch of people I am gonna call you a fascist. Cause if we just got rid of technology and returned to primitive living, a lot of people would die. Namely disabled people and people with chronic illnesses. It is indirect eugenics. Its exactly why most anarchists nowadays do not associate with anarcho-primitivists, and call them eco-fascists as well.
The reason why people like Bookchin and Bari are better is because they critique industrialization while putting forward solutions that don’t kill a bunch of people.
And lets not pretend like fascism is this coherent or cohesive ideology. Its an ideology of opportunism. Mussolini and Hitler were vastly different, and even just comparing Mussolini’s writing to his actions there’s a lot of differences. For example Mussolini’s writings were anti-monarchist, yet the monarchy remained in fascist Italy because it gave him an opportunity.
Ted might not have been a fascist directly, but his ideology is not incompatible with fascism. And the consequences of his ideology is still genocide, even if indirectly.
For real. It waters down the meaning of the word “fascist,” and now when I talk about actual fascism (with a well-informed take because I only use that word when I’m applying it correctly), people don’t take me seriously because they think I’m just “labeling everyone you disagree with as a fascist.”
I’m not. I disagree with everyone I label as a fascist, yes. Because I disagree with fascism and I only label fascists fascists. But I’m perfectly capable of disagreeing with someone without labeling them a fascist, if they’re not a fascist. I do it all the time!
Uhhhhh
Stop fucking saying he had good points cause there are better authors who have made those same points
Doesn’t this inherently imply he does in fact have good points if they’re making the same points… you also make a good point that there’s better sources that don’t come with a ton of ideology baggage but what your saying here is yes he does have good points but read someone else saying his points instead
Yes that is what I am saying. But just because someone made some good points doesn’t mean we should keep using them as the defacto idealogue. Imagine if we kept saying “Hitler had some good points” when talking about animal rights or Osama Bin Laden for anti-imperialism. If you want an edgy thing to make a meme like this out of, use the ELF or ALF. Two groups that are controversial but lack the eco-fascism narrative of the unabomber.
Those other authors need better marketing.
there are better authors who have made those same points without all the fucking reactionary and eco-fascism tied to it.
Seems like a great reason to discuss Ted’s viewpoints. We should definitely discuss the ineffectual extremists. Compare and contrast. Weigh and measure. That’s what truth-seekers do. Telling people not to read a particular author borders on censorship.
But asking people to expand their reading list and providing actual recommendations - that is wonderful and commendable. Thank you for that!
I never said don’t read it, but comparing and contrasting is not what is happening. Its like when Osama Bin Laden’s manifesto or whatever was making the rounds and everyone was like “ya know he makes some good points.” Everyone just keeps parroting the points of far-right extremists cause they pointed out a pretty universal issue like imperialism, consumerism, environmental destruction, etc. If the only perspective that gets spread is that of a far-right nutjob, then it normalizes the problematic parts of their perspective. Its always just begins and ends with “the unabomber made some good points.” Not “the unabomber made some good points, but Bookchin is more practical and not a eco-fascist.”
Was the unabomber far-right? He seemed to hate industry with a passion. That doesn’t sound very far-right…
I’m not saying he’s a role model that we should emulate, and I disagree with his methods. But that doesn’t mean we should reject his ideas. Stalin was a terrible statesman and a brutal dictator, but philosophically he had some points worth discussing.
Lumping people into this category of being “untouchable” is not only an ad-hominem, but it’s also damaging, because it prevents people from engaging with the material critically and in environments where there’s a diversity of perspectives. Now the only people who read Stalin are the radical edgelords who are disillusioned with western society and so take everything he says uncritically at face value. It wouldn’t have the same allure if we didn’t make it something in the “restricted section.”
It’s perfectly valid to say “Ted’s actions were wrong, but some of his ideas are worth considering.”
*its
Shut up ugly ass
The hair change makes him look like Dr. Tenma from Astro Boy.
It’s probably better to read the philosophers Uncle Ted was pulling from (and ultimately failed to understand).
Ellul especially.
Might be a matter of taste, but ISAIF is worth a read on the basis of its wild mix of sociological brilliance and unhingedness IMO. That’s not to say I endorse blowing people up in the slightest, but the work stands taller than the sum of its influences.
E.g. I think he synthesized and added to quite a few different authors in presenting his concept of oversocialization. (Please do correct me if I’m off-base — I love philosophy but it’s not my main wheelhouse).
ISAIF?
It’s Slways Aunny in Filadelphia
Industrialized Society and Its Future (name of the manifesto)
You enjoy doing extra work? Why not explain the gibberish acronym in the first comment?
Oh! I’m soooo sorry! I thought everyone wrote their dissertation on Ted “My First Love” Kaczynski?
Listen to yourself, you sound ridiculous.
It’s just off-the-cuff writing without copyediting. Tad sloppy, but weird hate, homie.
E: To squarely address my view of Teddy K, he’s in the same bucket as Karl Marx, Otto Von Bismarck, Rasputin, etc. Not someone whose core values I share, or think is a good person — but a historically interesting character who has cultural symbolic importance for the role they played in their respective time and place.
As a person of average intelligence, I knew exactly what the acronym was. Not sure the issue here.
It was pretty clear from context.
I follow the philosophy of Father Ted.
“I hear you’re an anarcho-syndicalist now, Father Ted!”
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Which philosophers?
Ted misses a lot in Jacques Ellul’s The Technological Society, which is where I’d start off f your looking for philosophers critical of modern technology.
If you’re curious on that particular subject, I’d also recommend Lewis Mumford’s Myth of the Machine or The City in History.
Or, for something that’s less of a tome (both Ellul and Mumford can be overly wordy), Ivan Illich’s Tools for Conviviality is incredibly critical of the modern world, but also offers hope that isn’t based on mailing bombs to universities.
Huh. I picked that up from a used book stand on a whim just based on the tile and skimming it, like ten years ago. I should probably read it.
The longer I work in tech, the more I want to move to a farm 50km from neighbours with just me, my partner, a couple dogs, chickens, and cows.
I’m in tech and live off grid, best of both worlds
Goals.
The longer I
work in techexist, the more I want to move to a farm 50km from neighbours with just me, my partner, a couple dogs, chickens, and cows.“The more I work in tech, the more I wish I was independently wealthy.”
I love how people use the word “just” when making statements about the simple life.
Simple ain’t always cheap…
Simple ain’t easy either. Fix yer plumbing, fix yer roof, fix yer fence, feed yer chickens (yes, every day!), clean their poop, etc. etc. etc.
Homesteading is a lot of work, and you can’t just go away for a weekend to visit a friend or explore a new city. It needs constant attention, and the more “independent/self-reliant/off-the-grid” you want to be, the more you need to do everything yourself.
And even then you need to buy supplies and materials. You’re not going to grow a year’s-worth of food in your backyard vegetable patch, and you’re not gonna make your own lumber, pvc, copper wire, etc.
There’s a lot you can do to achieve a greater degree of independence, but ultimately it’s still dependencies all the way down.
Even the Buddha recognized the interconnectedness of everything in the world; he wasn’t just some detached stoic with a community of self-sustaining monks. They depended on the generosity of their surrounding communities, and to this day Buddhist monks still do.
Depends how you live, but yeah. It can be expensive.
you should look at open land out in deep rural areas.
you’re more likely to kill yourself than get a farm these days.
not since the corporations bought up all the farm land.
Around COVID times, I had a coworker who bought a 100+ year old farmhouse out in Minnesota and we could see over time how he was fixing it up. Then he quit and started his homestead. Enviable man.
but yeah, I’ve heard of a lot of people in tech quitting at 20 years, which seems high? but at around 13+ years, I get it. I just don’t really know what I’d go to
I work in tech, but not “retire at 45” tech. I’ll be working till I’m 70.
I was in tech for more than a decade. I will NEVER go back to it. It’s life sucking shit piled on more shit.
I feel that right there
are you sure you don’t want spyware in your house? Are you sure you don’t want new shinies?! daddy oligarchs told me that was the most important thing in life.
Did you know that Northrup Grumman developed the standard USPS mail truck? They also developed the B2 stealth bomber. Northrup never intended for their truck to also be a stealth bomber, but Ted said “I’m about to do what’s called a ‘pro gamer’ move.”
Did you know that Northrup Grumman developed the standard USPS mail truck?
This was before the merger. It was just Grumman. They also built the Lunar Module for the Apollo program.
This is fact. Source.
Haven’t read unobomber’s manifesto and probably never will because fuck anyone who seeks attention this way.
Damn you’re so brave for condemning the unybomber.
Given the 2:1 ratio on that comment it seems like it actually is a contentious opinion. Maybe the backlash is all due to it being interpreted as virtue signaling, but… there’s so many comments in here unironically praising Ted for his ideas and refraining from commenting on his later actions (or actively justifying them as ex: a way to be taken seriously).
I think the contentious part is you acting sanctimonious about it. I know it rubbed me the wrong way, hence, my sarcasm.
I’m not sure it’s unwarranted to explicitly condemn the unabomber here, though. People are unironically praising him in these comments - if condemnation was as obvious as you implied you would have much stronger grounds on which to call me sanctimonious, but right now there’s plenty of people arguing the effectiveness of what he did in distributing his message and nobody that’s yet pointed out that he was a literal terrorist.
Unebomber had some valid complaints
They have been made by much better people who weren’t also eco-fascists.
Yes, but few people talk about them.
Thats the problem. So maybe rather than giving the eco-fascist more coverage, we should highlight people who deserve it
Unebombers actions were bad indeed.
I don’t approve of his methods, either.
Then again, I don’t approve of the Church’s methods, but there’s some pretty good stuff buried in the Christian bible, too.
Reading something doesn’t mean you need to agree with the author. It’s not like people are financially supporting the Unibomber, or excusing his actions, when they read his manifesto. They’re just studying history.
The comment was half just an excuse to mispell the name after OP set it up like that.
But from what I’ve heard, I’m not missing much of value, so I’d only be reading ramblings of a madman.
“We give up a piece of ourselves whenever we adjust to conform to society’s standards. That, and we’re too plugged in. We’re letting technology take over our lives, willingly.”
Absolute insanity. Obviously a madman.
Well I didn’t need Ted to figure that out. How does the rest hold up?
It’s been 30 years and people are still talking about it. He’d probably consider that a win.
He predicted that technological advances would lead to extensive and ultimately oppressive forms of human control, including genetic engineering, and that human beings would be adjusted to meet the needs of social systems rather than vice versa.
Kaczynski stated that technological progress can be stopped, in contrast to the viewpoint of people who he said understand technology’s negative effects yet passively accept technology as inevitable. He called for a revolution to force the collapse of the worldwide technological system, and held a life close to nature, in particular primitivist lifestyles, as an ultimate ideal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kaczynski
He hated leftist views, he hated fascism. He seemed to advocate a technological level somewhere between Native American and Amish. Call him an isolationist libertarian, I suppose. His solution to the problem is like something out of Fight Club - a one man “Project Mayhem.”
tl;dr: His methodology was pointlessly cruel and ineffective. But his assessment of the human condition wasn’t too far off the mark.
Just gonna rip from Wikipedia
With its initial publication in 1995, the manifesto was received as intellectually deep and sane. Writers described the manifesto’s sentiment as familiar. To Kirkpatrick Sale, the Unabomber was “a rational man” with reasonable beliefs about technology. He recommended the manifesto’s opening sentence for the forefront of American politics. Cynthia Ozick likened the work to an American Raskolnikov (of Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment), as a “philosophical criminal of exceptional intelligence and humanitarian purpose … driven to commit murder out of an uncompromising idealism”.
UNObomber? Is that the Mexican knockoff version?
No his letter just got returned to sender
spoiler
i will use that term whenever someone hits me with a few +4 in a game
Dead people can’t do much with attention
Yeah, damn that unåbomber guy
Onionbomber always brings a tear to the eye.
unobomber was crazy but have you seen the duobomber?
Not dos?
Technology is cool
Ted had some good ideas, it’s just how we went about doing what he did I take issue with.
but if he was just a peaceful crank on the street corner holding a sign people would have ignored him. Nobody listened till the bombs went off. And when he was caught all they did was make fun of his cabin. Personally I thought it was a nice cabin in a nice location.
Great taste but awful execution.
Unabomer is how the news wrote it.
Ted died in 2023 after spending 27 years in isolation in ADX Florence. Not sure if he considered that a win or not.
Wasn’t he mixed up in the white supremacy movement?
Nah, you’re likely thinking of McVeigh, who cited The Turner Diaries.
Yeah probably.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kaczynski#Manifesto per the wiki he thinks of the facists as a “kook ideology” but he was also anti-left guy so its really just him hating on everyone for the most part
I know a lot of people who hate fascists and communists. It’s kind of a thing, in democratic countries, to be wary of extremists.
I’m not saying this fully describes Ted, obviously he had mental issues. But pushing away extreme lefties with one hand and extreme righties with the other doesn’t make Ted any different than your average American.
I don’t think so? I’ve read a decent bit about him and never heard this.
I was more into his thoughts on women
