/lit/ - Literature

Does Ted realize that anprims, a group of people he hates, and ecofascists, a group of people he would presumably hate, are appropriating his work to promote their ideologies?

Are there any writings that contain cogent refutations of ISAIF?

Why is he convinced that the "primitive man" was happy just living a basic life? Is there any evidence of that claim? For example, Schopenhauer writes:

>“Human life must be some kind of mistake. The truth of this will be sufficiently obvious if we only remember that man is a compound of needs and necessities hard to satisfy; and that even when they are satisfied, all he obtains is a state of painlessness, where nothing remains to him but abandonment to boredom. This is direct proof that existence has no real value in itself; for what is boredom but the feeling of the emptiness of life? If life—the craving for which is the very essence of our being—were possessed of any positive intrinsic value, there would be no such thing as boredom at all: mere existence would satisfy us in itself, and we should want for nothing.”

Ted doesn't touch on this topic at all. Is he actually just a midwit reactionary that shouldn't be taken too seriously?

I'm thinking of writing Ted a letter. What are some things I shouldn't mention, besides the bombings?

>I'm putting together a team.

>>15374708

how in the FUCK did this son of a bitch get modern society right.

Should i read him?
What are his ideas?
Are they right?
Similar books?

The right wingers use his arguments against leftism but disregard anything else he wrote
People who didn't read any of his books say he's wrong because some DIY bombs
People use talking points that he already addressed in his writings
Others call him an anprim when he was against the idea and wrote a criticism of it
Why is that?