/lit/ - Literature

>>19867753
His observations were right, but his solutions are wrong.

>>19867761
What is wrong about his solutions?

>>19867753
I'm reading it and he truly is a genious, thought it was just a meme.
Are the victims worth the legacy he has left?
Sad part is that you can't quote him to normies or you'll be called crazy.

>>19867753
>>everything he said is coming true
such as? he's been on my backlog for a while maybe i should bump him up

>>19867875
just attribute the quote to someone more mainstream like Einstein

>>19867753
He's a Malthusian, my only issue with hin

>>19867753
Has anyone ever refuted technological determinism? I see a lot of people online talking like it's such a ridiculous outdated idea, but no one ever provides actual arguments against it.

>>19867753
I read both his books and his observations and solutions are both wrong. You are just a poorly read midwit. You read one book and immediately adopt it as your gospel because without erudition you cannot separate the wheat from the chaff

>>19868345
Recommend good books on philosophy/sociology of technology then.

>>19868326
I've heard people online be in favour of it but again these days people online have a boner for anything marxian

>>19868294
>Generally speaking, technological control over human behavior will probably not be introduced with a totalitarian intention or even through a conscious desire to restrict human freedom.[28] Each new step in the assertion of control over the human mind will be taken as a rational response to a problem that faces society, such as curing alcoholism, reducing the crime rate or inducing young people to study science and engineering. In many cases, there will be a humanitarian justification. For example, when a psychiatrist prescribes an antidepressant for a depressed patient, he is clearly doing that individual a favor. It would be inhumane to withhold the drug from someone who needs it. When parents send their children to Sylvan Learning Centers to have them manipulated into becoming enthusiastic about their studies, they do so from concern for their children’s welfare. It may be that some of these parents wish that one didn’t have to have specialized training to get a job and that their kid didn’t have to be brainwashed into becoming a computer nerd. But what can they do? They can’t change society, and their child may be unemployable if he doesn’t have certain skills. So they send him to Sylvan.
>Thus control over human behavior will be introduced not by a calculated decision of the authorities but through a process of social evolution (RAPID evolution, however). The process will be impossible to resist, because each advance, considered by itself, will appear to be beneficial, or at least the evil involved in making the advance will seem to be less than that which would result from not making it. (See paragraph 127.) Propaganda for example is used for many good purposes, such as discouraging child abuse or race hatred.[14] Sex education is obviously useful, yet the effect of sex education (to the extent that it is successful) is to take the shaping of sexual attitudes away from the family and put it into the hands of the state as represented by the public school system.
Sound familiar?
>>19868326
Its a hard thing to refute. It always boils down to character assassinations instead of logical arguments. Instead they pivot and spout nonsense and hope to get you trapped into an argument over words
>>19868345
You are a poor faggot who hasn't read a single thing.

I'm reading the new Houellebecq and this guy is mentionned a couple of times.

>>19867768
not guy u responded to but they're just not feasible. Its impossible to try and struggle for control of civilization's steering wheel when in reality it doesn't have a steering wheel and no one is in control. The vast majority, especially including the ruling class which they elect, are moving through space and time and making decisions with only the most superficial understanding of themselves and their motivations without any idea of the subconscious, metaphysical forces which are controlling them. The actual reaction to Ted's work and actions were necessarily those that would've happened in any situation: The masses, which had no understanding of this man or his ideas, clung blindly to the media narrative which itself did not understand his or more importantly their own motivations, which were driven solely by the fear instilled through his bombings. He was immediately boiled down to a crazy, scary boogeyman without his real image ever really being considered by the public eye. Same reason nothing can be done about the inevitable collapse of our society or could ever be done about the collapse of any society: the individual cannot control the world but can only hope to understand the extent to which he is controlled, in doing so freeing himself and obtaining enlightenment.

>>19868773
>can only hope to understand the extent to which he is controlled, in doing so freeing himself and obtaining enlightenment
how do dis

Ted was misguided, but in his defense the problem he pointed out is incredibly damaging too, but it's not the actual root of all of our problems. And given that Ted supposedly had some tranny leanings it's no surprise he did not correctly identify the problem with the modern world.


The feminine spirit is currently running rampant, infesting almost everyone it comes into contact with and they are all, men included, gobbling it up and making it part of their person. Any smart and well read individual knows its important to acknowledge and understand the feminine and masculine aspects of your nature, but to realize you are either a man or a woman and one aspect must win (the biological one). But the female spirit is not denied anywhere. Men embrace it and do not criticize it and women obviously embrace, indulge and magnify it. This here, is the problem with the world. And it will always be the problem with the world. Industrial society sucks yes, but industrial society worked for a LONG time without any massively negative repercussions. It wasn't until the early 20th century where things really started to go down hill and coincidentally it is the early 20th century where the feminine spirit took flight and blotted out the Sun infesting all human life.

Anyone who disagrees is a tranny

>>19868773
His solution is coordinated attacks on infrastructure, leading to global collapse. This does not require steering society somehow. It's not political.

>>19868793
You're retarded, as obsessed about gender as the people and society you criticise, you are the problem you describe, and before you say: no I'm not a tranny

>>19868810
Not an argument.

What is the problem I am describing btw?

>>19868778
recognizing the common truth encountered repeatedly throughout time by Buddhism, Hinduism, Jung and Psychoanalysis in general, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Dostoyevsky, Thomas Mann, Houellebecq, to name a few off the top of my head, this common truth being you can only find salvation in the consciousness that allows you to see the despair of a life lived unconscious of the forces that control you. Then, when you've more or less reconciled with the fact that resigning yourself to life in modern society is ultimately mutually exclusive with such an awareness, i.e. Kierkegaard's conclusion that one must necessarily choose between the the aesthetic and holy path, you must follow in the steps of forest anon and in a practical way pursue the life of livin inna woods. check this guys channel out and read Walden.

>>19868795
Look at the Luddites to know the not only ineffectual but counter-productive nature of this solution. Destroying infrastructure only gives the economy more to produce, further driving industry.

>>19868793
>>19868817
You're a faggot who says nothing

>>19868941
Not an argument and just pure cope. Likely a man who doesn't realize his entire being is made up of feminine aspects

>>19868345
>his observations and solutions are both wrong
Why?

>>19868947
>Not an argument
When you begin to say something substantive in tedk threads maybe I'll actually give you an argument

>>19868858
Attacking infrastructure doesn't mean mere monkeywrenching. Instead it would mean something like shutting off the electrical grid on a macro scale, shutting down entire countries. Since industrial infrastructure is a closely inter-dependent net, if you attack these vectors, hopefully, it would collapse the entire system. No factory can run without electricity. To build a factory and maintain it, you need other factories which produce the tools and resources needed. And so on and so forth.
Take me with a grain of salt though because it's been a while, I don't exactly remember what they said.

>>19868954
I did. Ted was wrong. Industrial society is not what is killing humanity. It is feminine worldviews, feminine perspectives and feminine wiles. My post states this quite clearly to cry about me saying nothing is cope. I'm not eve arguing against Ted I am saying he did not fully understand the problem. Industrial society allowed the feminine spirit to grow in power and grow in desirability, naturally so given that Industrial society removed the necessity of the truly masculine spirit. But it can exist without the proliferation of feminine attitudes opinions and mindsets. You are welcome to try again but you will just look retarded, not that you already don't

>>19868795
>His solution is coordinated attacks on infrastructure, leading to global collapse.
Yeah, and he's totally going to convince enough to people to do, and not convince people to hate him and restore what you'll destroy.

>>19868971
Not the guy ur arguing with, but you don't recognize that the pursuit of ease, comfort, and more significantly the offloading of the masculine responsibility of self-suffiency to the provider found in industrial society is fundamentally feminine? You seem to be making the case of your opposition.

>>19868971
You didn't explain anything and you're retarded and probably a tranny.

>>19869012
I dunno you used a lot of fancy words sir. All I know is society, since 10000 years ago has existed to reduce the need for man. Industrialization perfected this by making it absolutely unnecessary for man to exist. We are a redundancy now, physical strength and all the things thay it demands are no longer required to exist and so with thay gap filled in all our lives something had to fill It. And given that we have no cause for strength, no one had the strength to justify the existence of masculinity. So that void was filled with feminine wiles, cleverness, vanity, narcissism and worse. I argue that Ted is half right, but missed the whole problem cause he himself for his entire life was going through a massive war between his own masculine and feminine urges. Anima and animus I believe some people called it once but I never really understood why or what that meant

>>19869024
I dunno how uch more clear I have to write this. Masculinity gone. Femininity filled hole. Femininity is bad whe everyone is indulging it. Masculinity gone because industrialism (and society itself) reduce the need for it.

If you need this further explained I dunno, you should maybe stop being so stupid. Or maybe don't have such an emotional connection to the tedpill

>>19869049
>Masculinity gone. Femininity filled hole
Take your retarded jordan peterson jungian bullshit out of here you pedophile

>>19868983
Kaczynski is very explicit in this. He does not at all aim towards a mass movement. It needs to be a very small, ideologically motivated elite, a sort of vangaurd, who carry out this.
As for people "restoring" industrial society after a collapse, easier said than done. Even if possible, it would take centuries.

>>19869092
>masculinity and femininity dont exist
As suspected, anyone who disagrees with me is a tranny
Ted would have agreed with me btw, I have a letter being sent to him with his thoughts on the subject and I would bet my life that he agrees. Youre just a seething loser who sees him as some unfailing individual you pathetic feminine shit stain

Something I can’t help noticing is the people constantly shilling Ted are doing it via the Internet. Like how much do you really believe his ideas if you can’t even do the bare minimum?
>WAHH B-B-BUT I NEED THE INTERNET FOR-
Then don’t use 4chan at the very last

>>19869036
Ignore the faggot you're battling, I think we're actually making the same argument here

>>19869115
t. never read Kaczynski

>>19869162
No, he's right. If you are serious about Kaczynski's ideas, you would not post on 4chan.

>>19869185
But Ted used many things that were only a result of industrialization. The argument makes no sense. If there is an end you desire, all means should be used to achieve it. Anything less is cuckoldry

>>19867753
He's correct, yeah, but I put more emphasis on agrarian traditional societies such as those during Axial Age. I can respect the Pioneer mentality of being self-sufficient and self-reliant, but I support primitivism more for less modern distractions and the needed space of solitude in natural scenery, which is freeing and necessary in many austere religious paths.
Ted Kaczynski is like a primitivist Scythian, but I am more of a primitivist magus.

>>19869201
>Pioneer mentality
bootstrap mentality*

>>19869190
No one is saying to never use technology. But there is no benefit to 4chan. Even if you shill le tedpill hard enough to convince some people on here, they will be totally worthless, will never actually do anything irl, and will only make Kaczynski's ideas look bad by believing in them.
Besides, that's under the presumption that you only use 4chan to shill Kaczynski, which none of us do. It's just addictive social media like anything else.

>>19869309
Ah 4chan specifically.... probably correct I can't come up with a good rebuttal outside of sparse use for the sole purpose of shilling

>>19867875
/biz/ here. one of his victims, who is still alive, created a jewish scam cryptocurrency. if you name ted under this crypto's twitter you get blocked.

>>19869185
No. Ted encourages people to use the internet etc to spread his ideas. You never read his books

>>19869111
>Ted would have agreed with me btw
No he would not. You also plainly stated that Ted is wrong. And the problem is femininity. You're a retarded tranny

>>19869954
And that the *

>>19869954
I did no such thing I said ted was right but he didnt go all the way. The only reason the feminine spirit was allowed to proliferate so easily was because of industrialization, he is wrong in thinking that that was the turning point though, its just what enabled the turning point. The only reason he couldnt see this is because it took a great time for countless thousands of years of masculine dominance to really show its wear and tear. When Ted was a young man it was a problem, but it was one that was treated as a problem, now it is a problem that is venerated as something much greater. Im not surprised he missed it. When he responds to my letter I will let you know what he thinks of the idea but its objectively correct so I dont see how an honest and intelligent man could disagree

>>19868971
>>19870099
You're a fag who revealed his true colors

>>19868971
holy shit spotted the manlet. What the fuck does "feminine worldviews" have to do with anything? What does that even mean? I can't imagine being retarded enough to look at problems in the world today and concluding that the root cause of all of them is some weird gender thing. You're either an incel or a tranny because no one else thinks this way.

>>19867753
I did, now I'm a bit more suicidal

advancement of the human brain would completely nullify his entire world view but that's none of my business, apparently

>>19868842
>something something Jung, something something Houllebecq, something something seeing the despair of material life, something something austere path to holiness

TLDR:After sampling the trite delights of western middle class life* just go to the dark, spider infested basement and there starve yourself to death.


*(exotic food, drugs, domestic and foreign tourism including slumming, expensive gadgets and orgies)

>>19867753
I have taken the Tedpill. He threatened Rolling Stone to publish his manifesto unabridged and unexpurgated as means to force the technoligical question into public discourse, but the fact that people have forgotten about it shows the media-propaganda machine is way too strong.

>>19870882
What is significant about specifically Rolling Stone publishing it?

>>19868810
Uh oh Anon! Looks like you tripped the tranny trap! Haha! Tranny!

>>19868971
Despite your purported support for masculinity this is the gayest shit I have ever read.

>>19869360
But Jesus said "x." Read the holy texts, nigger

Haven’t read Ted. Not discounting hos philosophy until I do, but skeptical of anyone who thinks the problems they see can be solved by blowing people up through the mail

>>19868773
LOL the people at the top are heavily involved in the occult, this just goes to show how little you know about those in power

>>19867753
No viable alternative to industrial society, blowing up factories isn’t going to do shit, most people actually are happy

>>19868426
>Sound familiar?
Yes that's really interesting, bumping him up my list from what I know though his solution is get rid of all technology that I just don't see as something that can happen so that'll be interesting thanks for posting the excerpt

>>19867753
These viral marketing bot posts for a fucking upcoming fictional show painting Ted as a virtuous eco terrorist are just cringe. And yes I've read his manifesto

>>19871468
Is that why he's suddenly sprung up in meme culture with the Zoomers? I noticed his shtick was on the deeper side of the web culture pages about two or so years ago specifically and its only ramped up from there. I just thought it was the new edgy thing to be "about" in spite of the obvious contradiction of his popularity proliferating through technological means.

>>19871468
What show?

>>19867753
Look up Jacques Ellul.
>>19867761
Also this.

>>19871504
I'm curious, what do you think the solution is? In my view there are only two options; the first is doing what Kaczynski advocated and doing this whole anti-tech revolution business, accepting that you will be indirectly responsible for billions of people starving to death if you succeed. The second is resigning yourself to the hope of some inevitable collapse or perhaps God coming down to initiate Doomsday before industrial society gets too far.

>>19868793
based and correct

>>19871608

>>19871609

>>19871611
trannies malding itt, don't @ me

>>19868793
>>19871608
>>19871609
>>19871611
what no pussy does to a mf

>>19871615
>muh pussy
cope retard. I refrained from posting this one because it's less serious than the others for the topic at hand but here you go.

>>19871625
were a woman of your dreams come to you and offer her body, unconditionally, you would not refuse
this simple fact refutes your entire worldview
your worldview revolves around being lonely

you can lie to yourself and ignore this, but at the end of the day, during the darkest hours, this is the main source of your suffering

>>19871644
you've expertly destroyed a magnificent strawman, but you really don't know the first thing about me.
bodies are cheap. minds are expensive. the fact that you place emphasis on the body says more about you than it does about me. I don't just want "pussy" like I wouldn't want a woman who just wanted "dick". but let's do a little thought experiment. do you think allowing millions of refugees into germany is a feminine decision, or a masculine one?

>>19869309
Shilling about Ted on 4chan makes you a hypocrite and only furthers the belief that his ideas are bullshit. There ya go.

>>19871644
Ngl, I thought that was Camus for a sec.

>>19871487
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UljwenZnh4s

>>19871665
>do you think allowing millions of refugees into germany is a feminine decision, or a masculine one?
why would I use such a dichotomy for a decision that has nothing to do with gender?
why do you care about male / female so much?
granted, I live in a country with no niggers and virtually no feminism, but surely your cucked country can't be so bad that it's always in your face
>bodies are cheap. minds are expensive.
I'm just quoting this so the other anons could easily spot this quote and kek at it as well

you are a certainly a very serious young man (emphasis on young)

>>19871681
>why do you care about male / female so much?
a more pertinent question is, why did people like john money care about male / female so much? I would not be troubling myself with such things if he had not laid the groundwork for gender theory as it exists today. even you use the word gender instead of sex. are you aware that its popular replacement of sex was spearheaded by a mad scientist who performed human experimentation on two boys who both eventually described their experiences as traumatic and killed themselves? I care because others care. I care about the truth, the truth that men and women are biologically different. the truth that this extends to the brain, which is biological. the truth that deluding yourself otherwise only leads to misery. you need only look around yourself to witness the truth of these words. it's all there, for any with eyes to see.

>>19871696
>even you use the word gender instead of sex
I'm an ESL and it's simply easier to refer to it that way - they are exactly same things in my book
there is also no word for gender in my language
>are you aware that its popular replacement of sex was spearheaded by a mad scientist who performed human experimentation on two boys who both eventually described their experiences as traumatic and killed themselves?
I wasn't, but I can't bring myself to care because this shit happens in countries that cannot be salvaged

>>19871200
No other way to make his message public. While cruel, it's thanks to those bombings that anyone remembers his ideas, and why we're here discussing it now

>>19871260
tell me how much do YOU know, then

the System's neatest trick is still one of the best essays he has written. Piracy helped the system rather than causing it problems.

>>19871608
>>19871609
Retard, the immigrants are being imported into the west to serve as slave labor, wedtern rulers be they men or women (mostly men) don't care about muh white race they care about saving a few bucks

Pic unrelated

>>19870660
>>19870478
>>19871164
You are all very clearly seething trannies. >what does feminine worldview even mean
How can someone even type this? It is so stupid.

Industrial society existed for a long time before society got fucked. Implying that it wasn't solely industrial society that did the fucking. Ted even speaks on this you retards just don't actually read his words, or are too stupid to understand them. Industrial society removed a need, and that hole was filled. Imagine thinking an entire sex can't be responsible for thr world state when they comprise over 50% of the population


Ted niggers are the dumbest people on the planet, bunch of whiny low value men getting mad at the world over something that will never change

>>19871612
Too true. The trannies have been seething at me for simply stating the problem is women. Either trannies or faggots who have projected Ted as some weird father/sexual figure and questioning him is blasphemy

>>19872526
somalis don't work.

>>19868354
not the guy who made the post, but i reccomend learning about other technology related ideologies like cyber nihilism and trasn humanism and post primitivism to at least get a perspective on things.
(although you are likely to just come back to primitivist ideas even after all that reading so...)

>>19868793
>>19868810
>>19868971
>>19869092
you guys are calling him retarded, but he's right...
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/n1x-gender-acceleration-a-blackpaper

All memes aside is Ted ok? Have they given any updates on his health?

>>19867753
Is the solution to the Ted-Kaczynksi pill the Peter-Thiel pill?

>>19867753
Go back to ricing your Arch dotfiles Luke, your threads are as cringe as your videos

>>19868842
>recognizing the common truth encountered repeatedly throughout time by Buddhism, Hinduism, Jung and Psychoanalysis in general, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Dostoyevsky, Thomas Mann, Houellebecq, to name a few off the top of my head
Why doesn't it surprise me you mentioned all that garbage then neglected to mention the Holy Bible? Antinomian subhuman.

>>19868842
Share the link to the channel, please.

>>19871608
>>19871609
Why did you post two screencaps that argue two opposite positions?

>>19871020
I was wrong. It wasn't Rolling Stone, it was the Washington Post. What I meant was the manifesto was published in a major national newspaper, which exposed a shitload of people to his ideas.

>>19868793
>industrial society worked for a LONG time
Huh?

>>19868773
>it’s actually a super complex structure and not just a few hundred people responsible. Please don’t find out where they live and how they get to work every morning.

>>19868971
>Industrial society is not what is killing humanity. It is feminine worldviews, feminine perspectives
Books on this?

>>19868793
I do not think there's a need for a masculine spirit anymore. And if your diagnosis is correct the solution to it is even less achievable than the one proposed by the unabomber, if there is one.

>>19868963
>attack imaginary super centralized electrical grid
>country shut down for a week
>economy lose billions
>country gets money from allies, rising debt
>recession reduces growth
>life goes on as before except now unemployment is doubled and your country will lose a couple positions in the gdp rank
>you also are in jail and now imaginary super centralized electrical grid has armed guards outside
nice

>>19871525
you don't need to think about any solution, a capitalistic liberal democracy is the natural emergent consequence of human nature, if we end up in some kind of evolutionary dead end then it only means that we were never meant to succeed.
i'm sure that if you stop thinking like a fucking npc and look beyond what happens to be under your eyes, you can understand that killing billions because of an imaginary dystopia doesn't sounds too good.

>>19871611
>nebula
looks like penis
>tank
penis again

Actual tech chart.

>>19868773
>Same reason nothing can be done about the inevitable collapse of our society or could ever be done about the collapse of any society: the individual cannot control the world but can only hope to understand the extent to which he is controlled, in doing so freeing himself and obtaining enlightenment.
You stoicism faggots are infuriating.
>dude I can't do anything to save society! I'm just one person!
Pure cope.

>>19867753
Cockzinksky

>>19875380
Save us Bar Kokhba.
We will rally behind you.

>>19875690
Please, you don't have to be a leader to avoid defeatism.

>>19867753
Wow bro his background is too good for me to touch his manifestio I don't wanna get radicalized in minecraft.

>>19868426
No don't post this man's genius you'll convert truthseekers,!

>>19874496
I'd write one but I'm really bad at fleshing out my ideas. Just know it's true, and the most apparent way to see it in the world today is the rise of vanity, which is rooted in feminine wiles. The rise of incelism/lookism is gynocentric at its root because it 1. Devalues men and 2. Encourages vanity in men, which in turn justifies and encourages feminine habits

>>19871260
Anon I...

>>19874991
>believes evolution
>calls out others as npc
You are so lucky that my phone needs charging

>>19873499
https://youtu.be/fdwuH-ZJ_7E

>>19867753
buckle up, the next gen will be even more destroyed.

>>19867753

Every sanctioned social movement in the USA.

>>19877115
I've always wondered if women realize that the ''independence'' and ''equality'' they're struggling for is just the System's need for more educated, childless workers who are productive drones.
A woman with a similar skill set as a man's is the most useful tool in a company. Non-confronting, amicable, content with being instructed, lack of extreme ambition that could cause conflict.
But most importantly, women are very good consumers. You want a woman making 150k a year and spending it almost instantly, rather than a man who would perhaps save or invest.

>>19876644
darwinism is not only one of the most proven theories but it's also completely coherent with common sense, and its basic concept can be generalized to societies and ideas as well. not being an npc doesn't mean being a contrarian at all costs

He's right about everything

>youre underaged
>youre not well read
>his solutions are wrong
>read ellul!
ellul's solutions: some vague notion of individual revolution rooted in christian ideology. lol

>>19872615
faggot

>>19867768
I like the civilization, however shit it is now, and do not agree with his recipe of tearing it down altogether. If anything, people once were in the state he describes as ideal, yet following our dreams and desires we got here. What would stop us from making the same journey the second time?

While his observations are right, I would use them to make a non-shit civilization instead of throwing it away.

>>19877882
inb4
>but his observation is that a non-shit civilization is impossible
I have faith that it is possible.

>>19875150
Has anybody read the "Steps to an Ecology of Mind"? Is it any good?