/lit/ - Literature

>>22669371
The point of anti tech is white deradicalization and self-defeat so yes I think it is a cardinal point of strategy.

>>22669371

>>22669371
Yes, how do you expect the modern world to dismantle itself if it’s still operates by a arms race paradox with other races?

let’s say as a random example the Asians and white want to kill each other and both have advanced weaponry. Why would one side start dismantling its weapons and give the other a advantage.

realist political theory tells us that the unabombers philosophy demands there is no tensions between groups if it wants to function and that it’s only really possible under a state of unipolarity dedicated to his ideals.

>>22669371
Any true revolutionary movement rejects them.

>>22669404
Objectively correct take. Read picrel instead.

>>22669419
Wild how there is nothing espousing back to the soil romanticism or Blood & Soil thinking with which to unify a people and root it firmly in the land.

>>22669404
>>22669419
>>22669420
>>22670212
>>22670245
kys

Everyone would be more racist without civilization

>>22670296
He's not arguing that his ideal society would have no racism in it. He's arguing that a successful anti-tech insurgency can't be narrowly focused within one race. If the anti-tech revolution happens, it will have to happen everywhere.

>>22669419
>>22670212
Counter Currents has good resources for deep ecology. Derrick Jensen was interviewed by them:
https://counter-currents.com/2019/10/ten-questions-for-radical-environmentalist-derrick-jensen-part-i/

The editor of Kaczynski's books, David Srkbina, did an interview as well:
https://counter-currents.com/2023/06/counter-currents-radio-podcast-no-536-david-skrbina-on-ted-kaczynski/

Here's a useful introduction to Pentti Linkola, and some of his writings too:
https://counter-currents.com/2022/12/remembering-pentti-linkola-3/

Savitri Devi:
>>Thus, in a world utterly given over to American hedonistic capitalism and Soviet anthropocentric tyranny, she could see nothing to do but: . . .to aid all beautiful minorities attacked by the agents of chaos; to resist, even if that should delay only a few decades the disappearance of the last aristocrats among men, animals, or trees. There is nothing else that one can do, if not, perhaps, to curse in one’s heart, day and night, today’s humanity (apart from very rare exceptions), and to work with all one’s efforts for its destruction.
https://counter-currents.com/2021/10/savitri-devi-traditionalism-nature-religion/
https://counter-currents.com/2022/09/remembering-savitri-devi-13/

Some more:
https://counter-currents.com/2018/04/jorian-jenks-farmer-and-fascist/
https://counter-currents.com/2010/08/henry-williamson-natures-visionary/
https://counter-currents.com/2020/04/ecofascism-resurgent/

>>22670262
>this angers the lefty anprim

>>22670442
Im well aware, i hope that site continues to perform its educational mission. I would have loved to have seen Bowden debate those making the circuit currently, especially Peterstein.

>>22670442
Are you a paid counter currents shill? This gets posted in every Ted thread (of which there are THREE up right now, OP)

>>22670927
No, I'm a freelance racist with an autistic love of sharing resources. It literally makes me feel joy to imagine someone saving time or deepening his existing ideas because I chose to share something instead of being lazy and not sharing it. I am also big into deep ecology and feel like a lot of Ted readers don't know where to go after him.

>>22669419
Why does the author consider Ted "right"? Sure he's against progress but a considerable number of right wingers are social conservatives but techno-progressives.
Also, Linkola in an-prim? My understanding of Linkola, at least his later writings, would be that a dominant state would enforce primitivism under penalty of law. I'll admit I haven't read Can Life Prevail cover to cover, though I own a copy and it's next on my list.

>>22670970
The left and right wing dichotomy is a meme, it would do everyone well to stop subscribing to it.

>>22671091

>>22671091
basado. left/right, communism/capitalism are all tools of the devil to keep us distracted. those tools are about to outlive their usefulness and the final, one world tool will soon be unleashed after ww3.

>>22670245
Do you have any recs? Besides >>22670212 Darré

>>22671322
>Growth of the Soil, Fiction
>Man & Technics, Non-Fiction
>Hitlers Revolution, Non-Fiction
>Prussianism & Socialism, Non Fiction

>>22669371
>muh Industrial Revolution
Teddy didn't go far enough. The Agricultural Revolution was the problem.

>>22669404
Why are people allowed to post about things they havent read a single book about?

>>22669371
Pearce > Kaczynski

>>22671530
Fuck off Emilsson

>>22671670
I'm not him

>>22669371
>no true scotsman
But let's ignore that; his point is that racism & ethnocentrism would only get in the way of the goals of the anti-tech movement. It isn't targeting the true enemy, so it needs to be discarded.

le own nothing and be happy man

>>22670970
He’s “right” because he diagnoses the problems with globohomo and modernity more generally. He actually articulates a true understanding of the world (fundamentally non-progressive) and is not so faggy as to think this decay we are withering is in any way good (fundamentally non-marxian)

>>22671091
Pronomian vs antinomian
Order vs chaos

I firmly believe left vs right described a very real phenomenon even if the words are vague and misapplied, everyone still understands very clearly what these terms represent in the abstract

>>22671530
>neurotech

>>22671530
bahahahaha this fucking psued
'le technology will make us not suffer'
quoting this guy is the fastest way to let everybody in the vicinity know that you're poorly read. You will latch on to any new trend that pops up, buffeted by academic fashions as long as you live. What's today's position? Bostrom's futurism? Tegmark's embarrassing prognostications?

>>22671971
>Remove all heirarchy
>Remove all differences
>Remove all Order
>Remove everything
>Make everybody the same

Somehow right wing

>>22672879
>all heirarchy
Inherently Communist and Judeo-Christian.
>all differences
Inherently Communist.
>all Order
Inherently Communist.

Of course, but the thing is, most of his online followers are just deluded nerds who yearn to be edgy. They don't actually think through how it contradicts with their other grab bag of beliefs.

As I've said in a previous thread, I know that most of the right wing Ted K posters on here and places like twitter are all just middle class posers. They supposedly hate complex societies, yet seethe with resentment at black men as a whole who embody the primitive instinct of pre Neolithic man in it's purest form. According to their logic they should be happen to see them gain more of a foothold in society because they will help dissolve the industrial world they hate.

Think of any reasoning supposed primitivist poster around her or other places will come up with for still hating blacks. "Niggers are lazy". Oh, so you mean you hate them for not being made for surplus labor that an industrial society needs to function? The same kind you want to take down? "Niggers are violent" You know that violence was bred out out other groups by the mass societies you hate employing execution to create the kind of people that can cooperate in large groups that their system needed. "Niggers are dumb" What would you care about extra intelligence for if it just leads to oppressive artificial civilizations. They are as smart as they need to be to function at the level you supposedly want.

They also seethe at coalburners, when really, white women having sex with black men is a form of erotic rebellion against the artificially constructed roles for men and women created by advanced societies.
This scene is a good example of a white women finding momentary liberation from the industrial society by succumbing to her more primitive desire for undomesticated African masculinity.

>>22669419
>>22669371
>>22670212
>>22670245
Holy shit could you image unironically reading this trash? its literally just the marxist critique of culture and alienation but removed from all the actual explainations of why its happens and with a ton of fappery about hating gay people because ""LE INDUSTRY MADE EM!!!!!!""
>>22670262
SPBP
/thread

>>22671887
then stop sucking his dick

>>22673083
Sure, it IS Marxist critique of culture and alienation - but what solution do you propose? A benevolent dictator? Ted at least tries

>>22672989
Good morning, american liberal.

>>22669371
It's the reason he's wrong about everything else. He was American and Americans have never experienced the real world.
If you assume globalism is inevitable all progress leads to shit.
If my town comes together as a community and builds a watermill there's no downside, just more wheat.

>>22673341
Just call him a libertarian. And yes it's retarded ideology, like anarchism but for right-wing

>>22669371
>Is he right?
Him being a narcissistic psychopath invalidates any argument he could have come with. He was barely human and should have been thrown into a woodchipper.

>>22673268
yes, as much as i disrespect ted for his pretty meh anylisis of society and culture and how i think both what he deems as the cause "technology" and the solution (just killing them) is both misguided and stupid
i must respect the fact that he still thought very hard on it, tried to benefit everyone he knew through selfish feelings, making them good and still saw fit to risk everything trying to change the world

trotsky had a pretty good program imo, all you need to add a little derrida here, a some Fredric Jameson there and mark fisher all about
just my opinon and i know a lot of people think its a meme but whatever, tis the honest truth from me friend anon

>>22669371
I mean ethnocentrism does not imply hate, and all non industrial tribal societies were ethnocentric.

You don't have to consult Ted for ideological heterodoxy, think freely and be your own authority. Luddism is a very old movement that did not start with Ted.

I generally think more popularization of anti-tech ideas is beneficial. And I do agree that people of all religions, creeds, and races can be allies.

>>22673448
I mean, to his accredit, he got messed up from government experiments.

>>22673578
>he got messed up from government experiments
This is pretty much an overblown myth. He was already fucked up as a kid.

>>22673371
>If my town comes together as a community and builds a watermill there's no downside, just more wheat.
Ted literally talks about this shit. Sure, the watermill MIGHT cause you some bad effects, like if you work less because you’re more productive and use the bonus time to jack off excessively at home, or if the community rules that each member may only use the mill on a specific day, now you can only get wheat on Monday when you used to like doing a little every day, something like that.
HOWEVER, your community getting together to construct technology is what Ted would call “system-independent” technology. In theory, you could build it yourself. It doesn’t require designs from California, minerals from Africa, labor from China, factories in Korea, etc. Your community CAN’T get together and invent a new computer, which Ted calls “system-dependent” technology
This is why the Industrial Revolution has been a disaster for the human race. SI tech might have bad effects, but SD tech is the real enemy.

>>22673476
>trotsky had a pretty good program imo, all you need to add a little derrida here, a some Fredric Jameson there and mark fisher all about
care to expand on this? if not, where to start reading? I haven’t read much of Trotsky, or any of Jameson or Fisher. I went to a few of the meetings of my local Trots and found them too authoritarian for my taste.

>>22673378
There is nothing right-wing about Libertarian ideology. There is no difference between anarchy and Libertarianism, both exist on a spectrun of just how much people can tolerate before they realize its retarded. The political spectrum goes beyond what America has experienced.

>>22673805
oof, well trotksy has some pretty long books but i recommened (like with literally anyone id recommened, philosopher or not) to read his popular short books and pamflets that allows you to get a handle on what he thinks without having to commit multiple weeks to it

first two things id recommened are "The Death Agony of Capitalism and the Tasks of the Fourth International" and also "why marxists oppose indivual terroism" (actual title is slightly different but youll find it)
then id recommened reading some secondary literature on him written by someone who wasnt either a trotskyist or actively anti trotsky like maoists or something
then id recommend reading his book thats something like "on febuary days" which is pretty long and talks about the feburary revolution and is pretty good even if you hate him and his theories because they are first hand accounts of the events from someone who was a bolsheivik

generally, id say that the later on in his life that you read, the better grasp youll get and also not to read his earlier work from before the revolution because it tends to be long and also not exactly too relevent as most of the stuff that convices people to follow his methods is in the shit that he wrote after being exiled

>>22673371
>If my town comes together as a community and builds a watermill there's no downside, just more wheat.
Kys pseud

>>22673083
Ted's critique makes more sense because it doesn't cope with some ideological infatuation with "correcting" the wrongs when the only method moving forward when dealing with the techno-industrial complex is a purely subtractive approach.

>>22673476
>yes, as much as i disrespect ted for his pretty meh anylisis of society and culture and how i think both what he deems as the cause "technology" and the solution (just killing them) is both misguided and stupid
A misguided and stupid person would indeed convince himself its any other way.

>>22673779
You need to read Ted more thoroughly, SI tech almost always leads to SD tech. You can't stop further complexity from manifesting itself, only by depriving the means of doing so is it possible.

>>22673874
he couldve published his views -which most people even if they hate them regard as pretty well argued for in his papers- without boming like 8 building and injuring a ton of people, geez i wonder why people are much more militantly anti his views when they heard about that?
plus, its not like killing people advancing technology is going to stop it, you just killed a person

please think clearly and fully

>>22673883
>geez i wonder why people are much more militantly anti his views when they heard about that?
Why would I give a shit about the opinions of humanist cunts?

>>22669371
cringe