/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11252012]

Regardless of his actions, in his manifesto, was the unabomber right about society and technology?

[Anonymous No.11252019]

No, you have to accept some aspects of society and move on.

This is the best reply you'll get, this thread will be filled with teenagers and manchildren

[Anonymous No.11252024]

yeah which is why a bunch of sedentary tech-reliant twitter nerds put tree emojis in their handles to signal that theyre part of le epic tradprim revolution

note: the ppl that make fun of them are also retarded

[Anonymous No.11252033]

how does /lit/ feel about FYAD "weird twitter" ironic humor?

[Anonymous No.11252039]

>>11252019
I think the crux of Kaczynski's manifesto was that as society progresses, technology becomes less of a convenience and more of a means of enslaving the average person to follow along with society's rules; so as society and technology progress, people's freedoms are gradually chipped away for the greater good of the population. At what point do these aspects of society breach our individual freedom and inalienable rights?

[Anonymous No.11252052]

>>11252039
Never. Stop whining.

[Anonymous No.11252065]

>>11252039
>individual freedom
>inalienable rights

[Anonymous No.11252080]

>>11252033
Stuff like this is why I quit social media.

[Anonymous No.11252110]

>>11252052
>eventually unchecked industrial society forces one to commit themselves 20/7 to their job, working under horrid conditions
>"Stop whining."

[Anonymous No.11252126]

His predictions have been accurate up to this point. I don't understand the Crispr thing, but it's clear that the taboo around human genetic engineering is eroding.
Everything in life is a compromise.
>you can't eat your cake and have it too
He thought very long and very hard about where he was and was not willing to compromise.
The lesson I draw from uncle Ted's manifesto is figure out where I am willing to compromise and commit to that course.
He was a man who lived on his terms and had he not decided to try and lead us out of the Allegory of the cave he would be relaxing in his plywood shack today.

[Anonymous No.11252145]

>>11252126
The thing is, he would not be relaxing in his plywood shack, because other people were constantly encroaching on the nature around him. That was what caused him to do the bombings in the first place. He sought peace and isolation, and society would not let him have it.

[Anonymous No.11252160]

>>11252080
good decision. all the twitter meta irony post chapo accelerationist kantbot nihilist infighting / owning literally devolves into absurd word salad. this guys talking about necrophilia when he says necro

[Anonymous No.11252169]

>>11252160
imagine presenting this to someone who has a nirmal life and isnt online. delete all your social media, become a humble ascetic /lit/ patron

[Anonymous No.11252170]

>>11252110
...no?

I enjoy my job, pleb. Just because you don't doesn't mean anything.

[Anonymous No.11252207]

>>11252170
God, people like you are such a fucking BORE. Your answers are probably three or four words at most and yet you act like you grace the world with your wisdom when you contribute nothing. Give a shit for once in your trivial mediocre life.

[Anonymous No.11252212]

>>11252012
He makes some interesting points but overall it has an air of ivory towerism ironically.
That line in there about how technology was gonna lead us all to have boring service jobs and this being somehow not on an improvement on say subsistence farming is a point only an MIT professor would be obtuse enough to make

[Anonymous No.11252225]

>>11252207
People like you? They're manchildren.

Society is right to treat people who ACTUALLY think everything that is done to further societal/economic progress is evil.

We are to suppose, that if we exist at all as God-fearing men, we are existentially going forward at LEAST with SOME faith in others and ourselves. I agree that deception and corruption is rampant these days, but it is not the guiding principle of all that is good in society.

[Anonymous No.11252275]

>>11252012
Yes, 100%

[Anonymous No.11252287]

>>11252212
Farming is the best way of life.

[Anonymous No.11252314]

>>11252012
He was right about everything apart from abandoning technology altogether, and of course his actions

[Anonymous No.11252323]

>>11252160
If I ever had somebody say that sentence to me in real life it wouldn't even register in my brain as words. I don't know how people can envelop themselves in this culture, it hurts my head.

[Anonymous No.11252333]

>>11252225
I read your post three times and I have no idea what you're talking about.

[Anonymous No.11252340]

>>11252225

>I like my job
>I'm comfortable
>I got mine, fuck you
>Stop whining
>You only believe this because you're a man-child, and I, the infinitely wise, jaded, experienced, and world-weary True Man decree it is false
>So it's false
>Another tard demolished by my superior intellect

kek

[Anonymous No.11252341]

>>11252333
It's not a simple point I'm making, even though God is involved, that's for sure.

[Anonymous No.11252343]

>>11252340
>I greentexted his whole post and posted a picture of a giraffe in a car, I must win

[Anonymous No.11252347]

>>11252012

Idk. 90 percent right.
We are fucked on an unimaginable level, but a lot of his social analysis has the inch-depth of an edgy disaffected teen who just discovered Friedrice Itchyknee and thinks he's Zarathustra.

[Anonymous No.11252366]

>>11252341

I bet you really like Peterson.

[Anonymous No.11252370]

>>11252366
Absolutely not, since that point has me believing in God as an entity and Peterson is technically an atheist.

Next.

[Anonymous No.11252383]

>go to work
>come back
>have more ways to entertain or better myself every day with the help of technology that I could try or care to type in this greentext
>loser in shitty job tries to convince me I'd be more free if we collapsed society and went back to savagery

this is why no one respects primitivists

[Anonymous No.11252397]

>>11252366
>Mentions god
>W O A H PETERSON ALERT
Super insightful, teach me your ways.

[Anonymous No.11252406]

>>11252383
>Play an instrument
>Teach your children something
>Have sex with your wife
>Meet with your community and listen to a story
>Draw/Write something creative
>Take a walk in nature
It's not as entertaining as jacking off for the fifteenth time that day, I suppose.

[Anonymous No.11252419]

>>11252343
Because your argument is the equivalent of
>Slavery is bad? Explain this cushy tutoring position I landed then. Stop complaining and man up.

[Anonymous No.11252453]

>>11252406

Trust me bro, you'd have more freedom having to hunt daily to survive, then doing fuck all because technology is evil. Also Grug Chad's tribe is attacking again tonight, better beat them back if you don't want to be a slave.

[Anonymous No.11252460]

>>11252012
yes, but there's not much we can do about it and he sperged out impotently. Best we can do is wait it out and hope that society implodes on itself from over complexity before we're too far gone.

[Anonymous No.11252462]

>>11252212
True, full time farming (as opposed to hipster gardening) is a lifestyle, retail work is not. Farming is infinitely more psychologically healthy since it act as a framework for your idea of self

[Anonymous No.11252466]

Technology is supposed to help us but thanks to capitalism we have frivolous shit.

[Anonymous No.11252471]

>>11252419
Not at all, I'm saying that people shouldn't be whiny idiots in general.

[Anonymous No.11252478]

>>11252419
lol btfo

>>11252170
well gee guy who benefits for the system doesn't think the system is all that bad, oh fuck tell us more

[Anonymous No.11252479]

>>11252453
This but unironically. Freedom is inverse to the number of choices you have b/c of our limited mental capacity to make them on a day to day basis. The more hard set our problems are the more easily we can navigate life. Grug lifestyle still has more choices than peasant lifestyle though, which was peak freedom.

[Anonymous No.11252490]

>>11252479
So you are now literally defining freedom as the opposite of having choices? Get fucked commie.

[Anonymous No.11252500]

>>11252490

>commie

Americans need to stop using words they don't understand. This may be troubling though as I'm sure you would all mutilate sentences like the average caveman portrayal.

[Anonymous No.11252506]

>>11252500
The insult was obviously a hyperbolic joke you moron, but the first sentence was genuinely perplexed at the stupidity of freedom=no choices.
I bet you like walking simulators.

[Anonymous No.11252511]

>>11252490
I guess more accurately it's an optimization of choices and ability to act on them. More choices = less ability to act in most cases. Life as a slave isn't freedom but neither is life with a thousand tooth brushes to choose from. We're firmly on the side of too many choices today.

>commie
get fucked hick

[Anonymous No.11252514]

>>11252065
is this ghost trick?

[Anonymous No.11252526]

>>11252506

Paradox of choice.

[Anonymous No.11252529]

>>11252511
>>11252506
also keking at your association of communism, as bad as it may have turned out, with no choices. There are choices in life beyond economic. Even the poorest Ivan could choose a gf, choose a sense of humor, choose whether to oppose or support the regime, etc.

[Anonymous No.11252533]

>>11252511

[Anonymous No.11252547]

>>11252511
>>11252526
>>11252529
Kek all you like, it's a meaningful comparison.
>heres your option of a ZILLION DIFFERENT RAPPERS to listen to while you do the only job we have assigned to you based on advanced genetic and cognitive testing.
Deciding the primary mission in your life is the ultimate freedom, everything else is nothing in comparison.
You honestly sound brainwashed with psychobabble in even approaching the argument that it is worth giving up basic freedom to survival demands just because safeway has more than one brand of bread to choose from.

[Anonymous No.11252575]

>>11252052
the fucking state of you

[Anonymous No.11252596]

>>11252547
>Deciding the primary mission in your life is the ultimate freedom, everything else is nothing in comparison.
Extremely astute and well-put. Thank you.

[Anonymous No.11252636]

>>11252019
???

"Accepting" things doesn't make them ok. There's no natural law that says a species can't enter a collective psychosis and go crazy and kill (part of) itself. That doesn't have to mean it's wrong or bad, just natural.

[Anonymous No.11252642]

>>11252019
Well I think it's safe to say at this point, I was proven right.

[Anonymous No.11252649]

>>11252478
OH gee, guy who is bad at the game wants everyone to stop playing

[Anonymous No.11252659]

>>11252012
The real question is: is Tucker /tedpilled/ ?

>>11252533
>referencing redundant roastie "poetry", ever.

>>11252024
this caught on? I had thought all the tedposting on these boards was merely a way to furnish a pretext for low-level deep state functionaries to surveil potential political dissidents on a 24-7-no-holds-barred basis.

[Anonymous No.11252666]

>>11252649
oh gee, guy who has a vested interest in the game continuing wants to convince everyone this is the only way it can be played

yeah bro those sumerians, working 50 hour weeks LMFAO

[Anonymous No.11252734]

>>11252225
>We are to suppose, that if we exist at all as God-fearing men, we are existentially going forward at LEAST with SOME faith in others and ourselves.

What does this even mean?

[Anonymous No.11252738]

>>11252734
Not that anon but it's basically
>if you believe in God you won't be cynical
I think.

[Anonymous No.11252751]

>>11252012
His problem I think is not so much morality as it is ethics. The process for each person to identify crucial details about society and technology, if obscured by the overwhelming interconnectedness of techno-capital institutions may as well throw those who start to take notice, depending on personality/upbringing, into something radically altered from the previous state of homo sapiens. Some are going to deal with the compartmentalization in cities and "over-socialization" by just rejecting any association they may have with anything past their fears and desires. Some of these people are going to take a glimpse, and are stupid enough to brandish analysis on their dim-witted observations, so of course you'll end up with guys like him. If you don't have the humility (among other things) to reject the certainty of your own conclusions you're better off serving some investment fiefdom. But regardless of what I think is "ethically trending," or how "bad it is," I'll keep trying to get the people around me to read philosophy.

[Anonymous No.11252757]

>>11252666
>guy who has a vested interest in the game continuing wants to convince everyone this is the only way it can be played

This is exactly what it is.

[Anonymous No.11252760]

>>11252738

About as stupid as I thought it would be, I suppose

[Anonymous No.11252784]

>>11252760
not sure youre one to talk about stupidity if you didnt even get what dude was saying

[Anonymous No.11252787]

>>11252757
based

[Anonymous No.11252852]

>>11252547
>>heres your option of a ZILLION DIFFERENT RAPPERS to listen to while you do the only job we have assigned to you based on advanced genetic and cognitive testing.

Are you confusing the real life Soviet Union with Brave New World?

[Anonymous No.11252926]

>>11252323
I've seen people with thousands upon thousands of Reddit posts call other people or things "Reddit" as an insult.

[Anonymous No.11252932]

>>11252852
You have to understand I am speaking of a soviet world considerable years in the future.

[Anonymous No.11252959]

Just read Ellul.

[Anonymous No.11252964]

>>11252649
climate change can’t be stopped without total collapse, human enslavement to machinic consciousness is basically inevitable if we “slow down” warming and methane release

[Anonymous No.11253004]

yes, especially when it comes to spying and DRM, which was unknown to him.
good technology exists, but people are retarded and use shit technology like hoverboards, iPhones, Facebook etc.
if it wasn't for technology i would spend tens of thousands dollars on every book i've read.

[Anonymous No.11253033]

>>11252019
>No, you have to accept some aspects of society

Thats where you're wrong

[Anonymous No.11253140]

>>11252511
>neither is life with a thousand tooth brushes to choose from

Why not?

[Anonymous No.11253148]

>>11252784
>not sure youre one to talk about stupidity if you didnt even get what dude was saying

I'll go ahead and help you be sure then: I am one to talk about stupidity. In seriousness your post is asinine because 1) you yourself appeared unsure as to the legitimacy of your interpreted meaning, 2) there are a number of possible meanings to draw, so picking one and acting "sure" isn't an indication of intelligence and 3) my original post was intended to snarkily imply that whatever meaning the post held was incredibly poorly expressed while simultaneously asking for elaboration, not to literally express bafflement at what it could possibly mean.

[Anonymous No.11253163]

>>11253148
oh, im not the anon that interpreted the post for you. his interpretation is legitimate though. and ithere are not a number of possible meanings to draw. the sentence is kinda contrived thats all

[Anonymous No.11253171]

>>11252649
Now you've gone and drank the Randian Kool-Aid.

[Anonymous No.11253175]

Because adhering to Ted's revolt against the modern world requires a rejection of the current paradigm of success, those that subscribe to his worldview are going to be at risk of being accused of rejecting that paradigm solely because they can't succeed at it.

[Anonymous No.11253228]

>>11252225
>>11252341
>We are to suppose, that if we exist at all as God-fearing men, we are existentially going forward at LEAST with SOME faith in others and ourselves. I agree that deception and corruption is rampant these days, but it is not the guiding principle of all that is good in society.
Not if it's the Christian God. How you can have faith in sinful humans or yourself, or anything apart from God in this fallen world is beyond me. "Societal/economic progress" is spoken of quite directly in Genesis: modernity is nothing more than the reconstruction of the Tower of Babel, this time as a machine demon hungry for the souls of those willing to devote themselves entirely to the world who's prince is satan, for their comfy job, comfy house, comfy family, and comfy getting to pat themselves on the back the whole time because such good people too (what would Paul think?). It is a monument to the arrogance of man in his triumph of slaying god.
I don't think you have to take it as far as primitivism - there is certainly the case that technology can be used for good. But don't expect it to be. Man is evil. And there's a certain inevitability his doom; Revelation/Apocalypse. There's no utopia in whatever direction (acc/tradprim/statquo) - this is not the Kingdom of God. Keep His commandments, follow His commission, and don't worry about political solutions - especially don't judge others for their own views on such things.

[Anonymous No.11253285]

>>11252019
>we live in a society: the post

[Anonymous No.11253461]

>>11253175
Exactly. Well said desu.

[Anonymous No.11253675]

>>11252462

t. city basedboy who never worked in a farm in his life

stop romanticizing history you stupid faggots

[Anonymous No.11253755]

>>11253228
>some stupid fuck killed people and so I have to agree with what he says

Fuck you, fuck his stupid ass, fuck killing people in general.

If you kill people, you're a pussy. Period. It's weak. It's a weak ass mentality from someone who couldn't handle the world being the way it is and try to change it non-violently.

[Anonymous No.11253781]

>>11253755

Well, have you ever seen a primitivist who is also a well adjusted person?

[Anonymous No.11253786]

>>11252547
woah.. what if,... there were a zillion different jobs and only 1 rapper?!.

[Anonymous No.11253815]

>>11253755
>Being this much of a spooked moralist who can't separate a man and his argument
wew lad

[Anonymous No.11253824]

>>11253815
>he thinks the two can be separated

[Anonymous No.11253840]

>>11253815

>my argument is to murder most of the population
>that's kinda being a dick
>wooooooooooow how could you ever call me that based on what I want to do!!!

[Anonymous No.11253937]

>>11253675
Have you lived the farming lifestyle? No? Exactly. I am.

[Anonymous No.11253961]

>>11253937
I was raised in that. And only pseuds and old people with stockholm syndrome would ever say such a thing, so unless you're 60+, sorry, I don't believe you are.

[Anonymous No.11253976]

>>11252012
yes, about 90 percent so far. Just read the manifesto and judge for yourself there were sparks of genius + deep insider knowledge behind the work.

[Anonymous No.11254000]

>>11252959
Jacques Ellul is my god, I wish more people knew about him. He is not even translated in my language.

[Anonymous No.11254013]

>>11252462
Why tho?
What is it about substance farming everyone finds so attractive? Other that some form of mislead nostalgia.

[Anonymous No.11254015]

>>11253961
What lifestyle do you live now?

[Anonymous No.11254029]

>>11252959
Any good starting books?

[Anonymous No.11254074]

>>11253755
Why is this directed at me? I never expressed that sentiment, I never even mentioned Ted, and I doubt he'd agree with anything I wrote in that post.

[Anonymous No.11254134]

>>11253961
well yeah, I meant real farming, not the automated, "let me set up the gps on my tractor, hire some illegals to pick my corn and fuck around the rest of the day" kind of farming that exists today and which I'm sure you grew up around.

[Anonymous No.11254743]

>>11253140
Because toothbrushes aren't that important, you post-modern letzter Mensch.

[Anonymous No.11254888]

>>11254000
>Jacques Ellul
Who is this guy? Why do you love him? What's his best book?

[Anonymous No.11254923]

>>11252012
His views aren't wrong, just myopic

[Anonymous No.11254937]

>>11252033
It's very bad. I used to be a part of that subculture before it was really recognized as a subculture and it's just not... good...

The things it's influenced are good tho

[Anonymous No.11254940]

>>11254013
Well, for one, it is tied to a specific plot of land, whose transformations by your hard work you can literally see with your own eyes. This is vastly different from the nomadic cuck office worker who doesn't give a fuck if he works at A or B, because 1) he has no emotional attachment to his place of work whatsoever (and it must be noted that this is an efficient defense mechanism in a time where work life is more fluid than ever), 2) he would be making the same boring spreadsheets whether he worked at A or B.

[Anonymous No.11254997]

>>11254013
1. Working gradually towards something.
2. It's satisfying to build something unabstract, especially with your own two hands.
3. Your work directly benefits you.
4. You get to grow and nurture something.
5. You're engaging multiple senses and getting exercise
6. You're in nature, keeping your circadian rhythm set w/ sunlight, etc

There are a lot more but yeah like farming sucks but I think if you can swing living off a well cared for garden you probably should

[Anonymous No.11255156]

>>11252019
>No, you have to accept some aspects of society and move on.
political philosophy BTFO XD

[Anonymous No.11255226]

>>11252012

It's rehashed early Jaspers and watered down Ellul. The notion that technology limits our freedom is facile and not thought trough - so the invention of motor vehicle leads to the redesign of cities leaving less space for pedestrians, sure, but using this in order to claim that this specific technology entails nothing but a restriction on freedom is ridiculous. There's freedom in a car.

His ideas about society and technology in the sense sketched above cannot be divorced from his ideas (which are profoundly retarded) about human psychology and the power process. The invention of motor vehicles and its implication of redesigned space causing nothing but restricted freedom directly hinges on his primitivistic view of man as a creature that cannot possibly find joy in surrogate activities, but needs to be in a constant struggle for life and death in order to find meaning. Something that is claimed with no argument, causing his entire work to stand and fall with whether you outright buy into the notion, and frankly, I see absolutely no reason to do so. I find it especially ridiculous when his though is championed on a literature board, by people who admittedly enjoy literature, a decadent surrogate activity par excellence.

>>11252406

Almost all of the ones you list are surrogate activities, and things Ted would find hollow and pointless.

[Anonymous No.11255247]

>>11252012
Yes.

>>>11252019
t. cattle

[Anonymous No.11255272]

Notice how EVERY Kaczynski thread turns into 'yeah he was right about some stuff but definitely wrong about the rest, like I swear".

Maybe when we hit the 10000th ted thread these people will actually articulate their thoughts? How hard could it be to pinpoint two or three paragraphs and formulate some counter arguments? The manifesto is basically written for you guys to do it! Oh wait..

[Anonymous No.11255273]

>>11252012
he wanted to have a sex change, so much for muh evil technology

[Anonymous No.11255275]

>>11255247

Great argument. Did it satisfy your power process? Right, it can't, it's a surrogate activity to argue with strangers on the internet. Why don't you go hunting in a forest instead?

[Anonymous No.11255282]

>>11255273
>Unabomber's Psychiatric Profile Reveals Gender-identity Struggle
>Psychiatric profile

Psychiatric profile of a domestic terrorist. Have you even read Foucault my dude?

[Anonymous No.11255294]

>>11255226
the truth of the thesis does not require his premises at all. in fact not only is Ted right cars literally carve up and render fallowed whole plots of land stretching thousands of miles but the idea of constant struggle being necessary is proven by studying evo bio. you’re on the wrong side of the fence anon, you have probably 150 years left to figure it out. being able to go to the same place and meet human xerox copies isn’t freedom

[Anonymous No.11255296]

>>11255275
-------------------------->>>11255272
....
..
.
I'll wait

[Anonymous No.11255317]

>>11255294
>the truth of the thesis does not require his premises at all
t. doesnt' understand how arguments work

[Anonymous No.11255319]

>>11255275
I'll add that I find the power process a really weak point of the manifesto. And the part about leftism completely americanocentrist. But in EVERY fucking ted threads I ask you guys to actually elaborate on these points, and most importantly, the 80% rest of the manifesto about technology. Been about 200 threads, I've yet to see a reply.

I'll wait

[Anonymous No.11255358]

And here we are again.

still waiting

>>11255272

[Anonymous No.11255359]

>>11252500
Commies unironically make this argument:
https://youtu.be/1bqMY82xzWo

[Anonymous No.11255361]

>>11255317
t. doesn't understand necessary/sufficient conditions

[Anonymous No.11255377]

>>11255226
Don't care what Ted thinks are surrogate activities, I'm showing that there exists entertainment outside of watching strangers have orgies and skimming through angry articles about video games.

[Anonymous No.11255396]

>>11252019
i'd never let this fly irl. not because we don't agree, but because sheltered cosmopolites need a good beating to remind them that civilized institutions won't save their sorry infantilized asses in every situations.

Your entire existence is circumstantial, city dweller.

[Anonymous No.11255402]

>>11255294

How does evolutionary biology (psychology really, in either case some of the most underdetermined science of all time) prove that life and death situations are necessary for a meaningful life? How does a science make that kind of value judgment? You're putting forward and extremely bold claim.

>being able to go to the same place and meet human xerox copies isn’t freedom

Yeah, again, this is where the early Jaspers shines through. Industrial design history did not end with Le Corbusier, you know. There is more to it than functionalism. Namely, industrially produced artifacts as carriers of meaning, as ways to express attitudes, lifestyles, and so on - that entails directly a very heterogeneous output of these goods. Sure, everyone has a mac and one piece of IKEA furniture, but the picture you're trying to paint of ultimate homogenization simply does not hold up, historically or actually.

That industrial society should homogenize people as well, I simply do not see how. Industrial production is not automaton work for humans anymore. The horror of the assembly line reducing every person to an anonymous, merely functional cog in the machine is an idea that made sense in a very specific historical period, but not something that follows from technology itself with any necessity.

[Anonymous No.11255449]

>>11255402
>That industrial society should homogenize people as well, I simply do not see how
putain mais ces anglos faut les terminer à la pelle

[Anonymous No.11255494]

Still waiting

[Anonymous No.11255507]

>>11255402
It amazes me that the same people who rant about homogenization will also rail against atomization.

[Anonymous No.11255565]

>>11255494

For what?

[Anonymous No.11255734]

>>11255507
>atomization and homogenization are mutually exclusive
It's entirely possible that the two can happen together. In fact, that may be the goal of a totalitarian state or global capitalists. People who are so homogenized around the world that they can all be marketed to or controlled in the same way, yet are so atomized they don't give two shits if their neighbor gets carted off to a gulag or if their mother is in massive credit card debt sounds like their dream.

[Anonymous No.11255739]

>>11255734
Imagine being this scared of capitalism

[Anonymous No.11255746]

>>11255739
Imagine being this retarded.

[Anonymous No.11255941]

>>11252659
That poem is by Dickinson.

[Anonymous No.11255949]

>>11255746
Yeah tell me about it

[Anonymous No.11256012]

>>11252012
kaczynski was right from his own point of view, which is more or less the same as being fundamentally wrong. His view of society is horribly flawed, not in his ideals but in his perception of real life. He's also correct in that technology will reduce "true" humanity to the status of livestock, but incorrect in thinking it's important.

It's one of those groups of opinions you can't easily argue against because it's correct in a retarded way.

[Anonymous No.11256096]

>>11256012
Elaborate. I find his psychological analysis to be pretty lackluster, from his outline of the leftist personality to the whole surrogate goal thing. But on the whole I don't see how his analysis of society and technology is fundamentally wrong or retarded. It may not be eloquent and engage in complicated word games but his analysis is rigorous and clear.

[Anonymous No.11256118]

>>11256012

>He's also correct in that technology will reduce "true" humanity to the status of livestock

Oh please, enough of the pseudo-Heideggerian babble. How does a telephone reduce someone to livestock?

[Anonymous No.11256123]

>>11252019
>dude if you dont like modern society just move to the countryside
>oops forgot to mention that you either have to be rich or work you life away in order to buy some land
>sorry it seems that you have to "accept" this society
all idylic ways of life have been killed by modern society thanks to faggots like you

[Anonymous No.11256128]

>>11256096
well, the parts about the power process are, in my opinion, writing more about society than they are about psychology, and they're also the weakest part of his work on the whole. It gets a bit better outside the manifesto, especially in his critical takedown of anarcho-primitivism, but that exposes the fact that he doesn't think that hunter-gatherer societies had easy lives, just fulfilling ones, and in turn that exposes the fact that he projects strife onto basically every daily activity in the modern world and imagines his luddite utopianism as a panacea that would eliminate all psychological ills.

[Anonymous No.11256131]

>>11252012
at this point i don't care about people is either them or me

[Anonymous No.11256132]

>>11256118
i mean, it's artificial intelligence that would threaten that, because it'd eliminate the need for human labor.

[Anonymous No.11256135]

>>11254888
>>11254029
The Technological Society is the best starting point, Ted got most of his shtick from it. After that I would suggest Propaganda and The Political Illusion.

[Anonymous No.11256161]

>>11252160
by the sheer fact that he triggers chapofags hard
I am Phil Greaves biggest fan

[Anonymous No.11256163]

>>11252225
You have the ideology of cancer.

[Anonymous No.11256214]

>>11256135
Okayish introduction to the non-readers;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqCKjzs4_4I

[Anonymous No.11256248]

>>11253755
>implying the mass-man isn't the most murderous person that ever lived
just because they haven't killed anyone directly doesn't mean their modus vivendi haven't

[Anonymous No.11256819]

>>11252959
>>11254000
>>11254029
Ellul sucks.

[Anonymous No.11256839]

>>11256819
You want to elaborate on that?

[Anonymous No.11256885]

>>11252033
I’m 20 and when I read shit like this I feel like a boomer trying to understand internet culture, can someone explain what this means?

[Anonymous No.11257342]

>>11256885
It would be better for your health if you forgot about that post entirely.

[Anonymous No.11257349]

>>11256885
idk what exactly is going on there but I see altright memes mixed with tankie memes

[Anonymous No.11257419]

>>11256839
He's just another academic, who happens to write anti-tech material. Unlike Kaczynski who is in another league of his own.

[Anonymous No.11258523]

>>11252033
imo people take on a mask of irony because they're scared to express their true opinions or personality

[Anonymous No.11258799]

>>11252033
What even is this trying to convey?

[Anonymous No.11258877]

>>11253755
How do you wage a war non-violently?

[Anonymous No.11258915]

He was right.

[Anonymous No.11258960]

>>11252012
Pseudo-intellectuals have always clamored around the actions of the politically motivated, acting like there is some sort of purity to their actions. People like the Unabomber and Adam Lanza have a niche following that act as if they were proof of a intersecting border between intellectuals and the insane. What makes it disgusting is that by defending their ideologies, their strengths become the speaker's strengths and the flaws they defend is similar to defending their own personal flaws. Similar to a nationalist who blindly follows his country, he'll cite his ancestors' achievements as if they're his own despite never producing anything of value.
The Unabomber claimed that the continuing advancements of technology would result in an increase loss of social freedom, in exchange for convivence, Kaczynski believed that we would end up enslaved to the technology that was meant to empower us. The individual's freedoms are sacrificed for the greater good of society, that is not up for debate. My freedom to attack everyone I dislike is in conflict with society's laws and enforcement, in exchange for an overall decrease to violence and an overall increase to society's peace of mind. No matter how much I would enjoy attacking someone, it cannot be compared to the sheer amount of benefits from preventing me to do so. However, unchecked industrial advancements and technology can lead to a disastrous route to human societies. Each year the amount of land that is not attached to the laws of human civilization seems to grow smaller and smaller, making the idea of leaving it harder each day. But it is not what the Unabomber feared that I have a problem with, it's his solution, one that a teenager would come up with after reading some Sparknotes articles on philosophy and thinks he understands how the world works. His solution was to reject all forms of authority, whether it came from a government source or a computer chip, and return to a pre-industrial state, before technology has grown so ingrained in our lives.

[Anonymous No.11258962]

>>11258960
Adam Lanza had a similar philosophy, he liken the mass murderer Anders Breivik to a chimpanzee that ripped off a woman's face. He claimed that similar to Anders, the chimpanzee was fed up with being kept away from it's natural habitat and revolted in anger. Therefore, similar to the Unabomber, Lanza argued that our current society must be abolished because it makes people lash out in violence because they're containing their desire for conflict, similar to the chimpanzee. That violent reaction Lanza discussed wasn't because it was introduced to a new culture the chimp was indoctrinated in. The real reason why was that it was on Xanax, something Lanza even mentions. He even understands that Xanax is well known to make animals aggressive. But he still called for a similar abolishment of modern society because of his blind obsession with mass shooters like Breivik. That primitive society that they called for has a higher homicidal rate than any modern war, which alone creates a strong argument on why modern society should be preserved.

[Anonymous No.11258963]

>>11258877
Why would you wage war at all, instead of effecting changes civilly?

[Anonymous No.11258964]

>>11258962
tl;dr: It's not wrong to criticize the pace that technology develops, especially since the best interests are usually in their creators and not the consumers. But to mindlessly agree with the Unabomber is foolish, even if you're not referring to his actual bombings. There is value in the desire to get away from it all, all the technology and nosy neighbors. But to pretend that undoing centuries of human progress would actual increase an overall quality of life is foolish and is usually only taken seriously by teenagers and edgy jerks on the internet. The individual will always have access to new opportunities that society prohibits, but you can't forget that technology does unlock other opportunities that would be originally unacceptable, from prosthetic limbs to being able to communicate with a large audience easily like I'm doing right now. Overall technology will provide more freedoms if we just define it as pure opportunities, but we should be careful not to give up freedoms we need for opportunities we think we want.

It's not too late to change your ways.

[Anonymous No.11259014]

>>11258964
>we should be careful not to give up freedoms we need for opportunities we think we want.

this is the issue. there is no being careful. it is happening en masse and with little opposition.

[Anonymous No.11259027]

>>11258964
>>11258962
>>11258960
based effortposter

[Anonymous No.11259028]

[Anonymous No.11259054]

>>11259014
It is definitely happening and I would be a fool to argue against that. The problem is that the Unabomber called for a complete restart button when the problem is that human greed and unhinged development is being allowed to grow without being checked. There must be something done about it, but the solution offered by Kaczynski will not suffice. It's like a child lashing out in anger because he sees something he hates, that outburst of anger will not make it disappear for good.

[Anonymous No.11259303]

>>11257419
Ellul was THE academic who wrote about technology, nobody has come up with anything of similar magnitude after he laid the foundations in the 50’s. All of Ted’s worthwhile stuff is cribbed from Ellul, the man has said it himself.

[Anonymous No.11259310]

>>11252383
>I have more Netflix to watch in this era than anytime in the past.

Did you even bother reading his essay?

[Anonymous No.11259641]

>>11252012
he was an atavistic pseud, the true /lit/erary philosopher who tried to see technology and nihilism to their respective and mutual end was mitchell heisman, the elliot guy is for the /r9k/ normalfags

[Anonymous No.11259801]

>>11252012
I think the core of Kaczynski's analysis of technological progress is correct, whether it's a simplified version of Ellul or not. He also sketches out an interesting revolutionary approach that I think far-left, post-left and deep ecology radicals could learn from. I think (ironically) that with the internet and the increasing dissatisfaction in contemporary society the text will assume the status of the Communist Manifesto of its age, a gross simplification of a much more complex ideological question that nonetheless is brilliantly and succinctly written and has the capability because of its breadth and accessibility of spreading easily and catching on.

[Anonymous No.11259806]

>>11259641
Suicide Note Is Unironically Great

[Anonymous No.11259987]

>>11259310

Why even bother making this post in which you're going out of your way to be dishonest?

[Anonymous No.11260193]

>>11259801
maybe the left could learn if they weren't hopelessly marred
reading this thread I can see a lot of grumbling leftists who take offence to his assessment of them

[Anonymous No.11260651]

>>11258964
>Overall technology will provide more freedoms if we just define it as pure opportunities

See sec. 94 of ISAIF for Ted's definition of freedom; its not just maximizing opportunities.

Furthermore, sec. 170 addresses the idea of technology having a net positive impact overall, despite the suffering it causes. This is not at all a given, since rapid technological advancement always comes with unforeseen consequences despite any sort of central planning.

Ellul discusses this to great length in The Technological Society as well.

[Anonymous No.11260709]

>>11260651

Yeah bro I'll think I'll take plumbing, electricity, modern medicine and the like to taking some deranged murderer's word for utopia, thanks.

[Anonymous No.11260728]

>>11260193
>hte left
he thought conservatives were incoherent retards as well

[Anonymous No.11260729]

>>11252019
fpbp

[Anonymous No.11260735]

>>11253033

Nigga just wait a few years and you grew up of that mentality

[Anonymous No.11260771]

>>11252419
Nigga ffs it is always the same arguments with dumb assholes like you
We are not slaves, you fucking asshole. Just because you have to take care of yourself and make money it doesnt mean you are a slave, you dumb fuck

[Anonymous No.11260962]

>>11260735
you tell em dude, resistance is futile

[Anonymous No.11261081]

>>11253755
Pathetic, embarrassing, sad post.

[Anonymous No.11261198]

>>11258960
But it is not what the Unabomber feared that I have a problem with, it's his solution, one that a teenager would come up with after reading some Sparknotes articles on philosophy and thinks he understands how the world works.
le responsible, redditor cuck
>The real reason why was that it was on Xanax, something Lanza even mentions.
reductionist idiocy
>That primitive society that they called for has a higher homicidal rate than any modern war, which alone creates a strong argument on why modern society should be preserved.
weak redditor garbage human. unthinking, neutered libdem cattle.

[Anonymous No.11263130]

>>11252012
Yes

[Anonymous No.11263232]

>>11253786
and the one rapper is lil b

[Anonymous No.11263338]

>>11255396
amen. fuck city-dwellers

[Anonymous No.11263350]

>>11261081
You're a weak faggot.

[Anonymous No.11263682]

The crux of the issue is whether you believe that we are better off satisfying lower level impulses instead of abstractions of them. If you think that progress as a whole is enough, or ought to be enough, to satisfy the drives of a human being then you'd say he's wrong. If instead you think human beings cannot be satisfied by the general successes that he's only abstractly connect to, then you'd say he's right.

The rest of what he wrote had to do with what he saw as the mechanism by which one of these two situations was right.

[Anonymous No.11263948]

>that 30 year old bomber who hates technology

[Anonymous No.11264090]

>>11260771
Everybody has a master.

[Anonymous No.11264104]

>>11252024
hey bud I'm just here for the memes

[Anonymous No.11264227]

>>11258962
>>11258962
>That primitive society that they called for has a higher homicidal rate than any modern war, which alone creates a strong argument on why modern society should be preserved.
This particularly stands out. Why should this be such a fundamentally good thing that it overrides all else?
>technology does unlock other opportunities that would be originally unacceptable, from prosthetic limbs to being able to communicate with a large audience easily like I'm doing right now.
These needn't be good things either. The cripple getting a prosthetic limb can induce dysgenics by promoting unfit specimen, for example. Mass communication from the internet is an incredibly influential thing, and if it remains will shape the evolution of humanity itself. I believe it's awfully destructive to the mental and social state of humans.

[Anonymous No.11264279]

>>11263350
>>11253755
how is slave morality?

[Anonymous No.11264301]

>>11264279
>Not killing people is ''''''slave morality'''''''

Please stop reading Nietzsche.

[Anonymous No.11264303]

>>11264301
make me, slave

[Anonymous No.11264346]

>>11252406
>more options are bad