/lit/ - Literature

>>21696359
Very insightful and intelligent take.
It has nothing to do with resentment, and everything to do with the objective material conditions that we evolved through millions of years to live in. The very conditions that industrial society is destroying.

Man, a biological organism, is the sum of millions of years of evolution and refinement to produce an efficient organism that strives in a particular environment. Technological society introduces changes at a pace FAR quicker than evolution and mutations can catch up to. Therefore industrial society is objectively deleterious to homo sapiens.

If you disagree with this then you are a nihilist in every sense of the word.

>>21653220
Absolutely, Foucault for his methodology and Debord because he is right about almost everything.

>l'imposture de la satisfaction doit se dénoncer d'elle même en se remplaçant, en suivant le changement des conditions générales de la production. ce qui affirmait avec la plus parfaite impudence son excellence définitive change pourtant, et c'est le système seul qui doit continuer

I have read the book front to back a dozen times, and I still open it weekly. I can recite half of it by heart at this point kek.

>>21653584
Great names. Add Camatte who is too often forgotten.

>>21659311
Kaczynski attacks the psychological motives of leftist activists. He is in every metric much closer to the radical left than any other "side". His framework is purely materialistic and unlike individualist types he has historical consciousness. Possibly one of the most important person of our times.

>>21615765
The entire point of choosing SEEMINGLY irrelevant target is to further the point that industrial society, being interconnected, is not the product of the will of individuals but an autonomous system.
Targeting high profile tech leaders would completely undermine the entire point of his works, that the system is autonomous, that human will is not a historical determinant, that technique builds upon itself.
The anti-tech movement would be no different than social-democrats, ISIS or the Thai monarchy if it posits the individual as some free-willing and rational historical actor. These groups do not seek radical change in material conditions but fight for the object of power. "The Development of a Society Can Never Be Subject to Rational Human Control " reads chapter 2 of anti-tech revolution.

Who is to claim that the death of the president would have more impact than the death of an unknown engineer whose works were about to radically impact material conditions? Can the death of this particular engineer even have that much of an impact?
The perception that certain hierarchical position or "powerful" individuals have the potential to steer the course of a particular or general (historical) event is mostly ideological. The very nature of industrial society and the political and social organization that follows is that power diffuses horizontally and the action of the individual is drown out by the inertia of material conditions.

>>21562606
The quickest way to out an ignorant is to ask him about Kaczynski. If he calls him a reactionary you know you're dealing with a dishonest fag who has not read him.

>>21527069
i'm not op but I check all your points. yesterday i spent the whole day hunting but this post will be ignored by those whose justification of their frail ideology require a boogeyman to attack.

your post is typical of the fundamental enmity that defines social relationship under production economies(civilization). you cannot think outside antagonism. do not sully me or kaczynski with your projected boogeyman. Entertaining an abstract ennemy in your head means nothing beyond your impotence and your weak grasp on reality. coming up with irrelevant checklists is honestly pathetic.

>>21529153
TK wrote for posterity. he always corrects himself, is open to new data to review his previous positions and will always rectify crude errors on his part.

>The development of a society can never be subject to rational human control
the implications of this statement are profound. it is the culmination of historical materialism. It is the nail in the coffin of revolutionary fetishism, political idealism, and most importantly political representation. It is the next step in historical consciousness. It removes us from the internal dialectics of civilization; which were promised to us as our salvation. Many have written deeper and more incisive critiques on the subject, but none are as contemporary as Kaczynski. Now we take it from here.