/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21493049]

What tips would you have given Ted Kaczynski to improve his writing?

>The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.

Isn't a disaster also a consequence? This sentence is weird and not very inviting. A strange way to introduce your big statement to the world.

This early reaction to the manifesto by Kirkpatrick Sale is funny and interesting to read in hindsight:

'The sixty-six pages that follow begin with two pages of trivial typo corrections, showing he kind of fastidiousness (“sovle” should be “solve,” “poit” should be “point”) one might expect from a craftsman whose bombs the F.B.I. has described as “meticulously” constructed; then come fifty-six pages of argument divided into twenty-four subtitled sections and 232 numbered paragraphs; and it all ends with thirty-six foot-notes, mostly qualifying statements in the text. That form, plus the leaden language and stilted diction, the fondness for sociological jargon and psychobabble, and the repeated use of “we argue that” and“we now discuss” and the like, make it certain that this was written by someone whose writing style, and probably whole intellectual development, was arrested in college.'

https://www.scribd.com/document/260727678/April-3-1996

[Anonymous No.21493071]

>>21493049
His writing style was probably influenced from his time as a mathematician. Cant be too concerned about prose when you have to qualify and prove every fucking letter in your paper.

[Anonymous No.21493082]

>>21493049
>The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
Literally a "Call me Ishmael" tier opening. Couldnt have done it better.

[Anonymous No.21493113]

>>21493049
know your genre before you post shite like this. he wrote according to the 1960s uchicago dissertation style guide (engineered for typewriters) and strunk and white’s ‘elements of style.’ this explains the errata—which he addressed and corrected if you had the brain to read the manifesto—and the dialectal/idiolectal quirks.

[Anonymous No.21493131]

>>21493113
yep. i’m not gonna argue with op on the writing style; ted wrote… like a guy who has a ph.d. in math.

[Anonymous No.21493730]

>>21493071
this. you dont fuck with mathematical papers

[Anonymous No.21493746]

>>21493071
>>21493113
>>21493131
>>21493730
It wasn't even intended to be prose literature. It was a manifesto explaining the effects of industrial society and laying out a solution. It was intended to be extremely simple and easy to understand while still having enough information to convince an educated individual.

[Anonymous No.21493768]

He writes in a way that can't hardly be argued with. That's why you have never read anything addressing his arguments directly.

> written by someone whose writing style, and probably whole intellectual development, was arrested in college
this sound like a typical comment of someone whose intellectual development was arrested in college kek

[Anonymous No.21494260]

>>21493049
>What tips

biggest would be not to send any bombs anywhere but nobody listens to me wahh

[Anonymous No.21495208]

>>21493113
The genre is persuasive writing and it’s boring as shit

[Anonymous No.21495259]

>>21493049
>>Isn't a disaster also a consequence?
actual retard, your verbal IQ is clearly low and you are probably underaged.

[Anonymous No.21495303]

>>21493082
>>The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
Grammatically incorrect opening sentence.

[Anonymous No.21495317]

>>21493049
discord.gg/NJ3nRUZKdU

[Anonymous No.21495430]

Ted probably should have just spent some time with the Amish. Most of what he says is consistent with their dedication to being able to express caution and not be forced to adopt technological developments.
I doubt he could have accepted the religious aspect that the Amish found their society on and would actually make his propositions actionable but that's why he gets for being a mathematician.

[Anonymous No.21495448]

>>21495430
He talks about them. The problem is that they're already being bullied by industrial society and have been forced to adopt many technologies due to regulations and it will likely get worse. A few Amish have been imprisoned for violating animal husbandry licenses or other nonsense which would be an utterly unthinkable situation in a non-industrialized world.
Their position is tenuous at best and the moment the industrial world decides to fuck them up it can and will. Not to mention they're already forced to breathe in industrial pollutants and drink xeno-estrogens and microplastics from their natural water sources.

[Anonymous No.21495454]

>>21493746
What’s your point? It’s still required to be well written, have good rhetoric and arguments if it’s to be taken seriously. As with all writing.

[Anonymous No.21495487]

>>21495454
If someone is the kind of faggot that wants pretty words before he'll believe an argument he's be a useless fence sitter and not a proper revolutionary.

[Anonymous No.21495489]

>>21495448
hmm yeah they are pretty weak but it's not because they are low tech.
You can have very strong low tech societies, Scientology genuinely being a good example of that.
Instead of fighting with bombs or stubbornness they just open lawsuits against individuals in government.
Low tech solution of bitching that gives them power and if you add the communist and techno-decelerationist aspects of the Amish everything is chill.
It really just ruins your arguments when you don't understand how to gain power by "merit" and instead resort to force.

[Anonymous No.21495497]

>>21495489
The Amish do not have power. You've gone insane.

[Anonymous No.21495510]

>>21495497
I agree they do not, and routinely get pushed around.
To reiterate he does not understand how to gain power by merit to any degree beyond an academic setting.
That they get pushed around doesn't mean their way of life is impossible to preserve, but Ted doesn't understand how religion works so he uses bombs.

[Anonymous No.21495511]

>>21495497
they’re a recognised religious organisation right ? In principle quite hard for the state beaurocracy to squeeze.

[Anonymous No.21495539]

>>21495510
>>21495511
You don't understand the problem. That's not to say you're stupid, you may be quite intelligent, but that isn't really Kaczynski's point.

[Anonymous No.21495541]

>>21495511
The principle of making sure people are free to practice religion isn't out of altruism it's just that modern countries often gamble that any religious faction will more often then not be a local phenomena and more effort than it's worth to stop.
But to get to that point where it would become more effort than it's worth to stop is no simple feat.
Christianity was uniquely strong enough to destroy Rome and I suspect L. Ron Hubbard has created something that can overpower America.

[Anonymous No.21495557]

>>21495539
I might not, I read the thing once early last year. I am under the impression that the disastrous consequences were that individuals can't effectively consent to what other people put into the world.

[Anonymous No.21495561]

>>21495541
yeah, i think you’ve articulated the pragmatics of the relation between state and religious organisations quite well and I agree with what you say.

[Anonymous No.21495573]

>delve deeply into Teddy K's writings
>so Ted do you have any tangible plans? What wisdom can you offer to achieve your goals on a practical level?
>lol I don't have a fucking clue bro, just somehow find a way to irrevocably destroy technoindustrial civilisation lmao

geee thanks for the useful advice you MKultra'd tranny. fuck this dude

[Anonymous No.21495575]

>>21495541
just to reiterate though, the other anon said something like the Amish had no or very little power, I was just addressing that assertion in particular, since, as a recognised religious organisation, even if the basis for that recognition isn't altruistic but based in the pragmatics of game theory, they’d still possess a degree of autonomy and be able to resist the power of the state, but the recognition is given defacto that these organisations do in fact possess an authority and power greater than the state

[Anonymous No.21495584]

>>21495575
Only insofar as the state continues to recognize them, which could end as abruptly as a single election.

[Anonymous No.21495596]

>>21495575
within the pragmatics of game theory they hold power, in addition the recognition (of their religious authority) is itself given defacto that these organisations in fact possess an authority and power independent of the state and that the state has no legitimacy to encroach upon * just to add a little clarity on that last bit.

[Anonymous No.21495625]

>>21495584
>>21495596
if a religious organisation were to become an unrecognised organisation by the state, the state can only withdraw certain concessions that it previously extended to the aforementioned organisation, like tax free status, it cant however prevent the continued religious practice of the organisation, seeing as an organisation as defined by the state is merely a collection of private individuals, recognition by the state is not a necessary perquisite for legitimacy, but legitimacy is a necessary perquisite for recognition by the state.

[Anonymous No.21495630]

>>21493049
He was a psyop and even then his manifesto is indistinguishable from a typical Fox News comment section post but with big words added in

[Anonymous No.21495633]

>>21495625
just to clarify the last point, recognition of a religious organisation by the state does not make that organisation legitimate, rather, it is that the organisation is legitimate that the state recognises it.

[Anonymous No.21495635]

>>21495625
>it's now illegal to raise farm animals because carbon emissions
>green growth limits make private unlicensed farms illegal
>riding horses is animal cruelty
>you are now required to have electricity and running water or face eviction and inprisonment
All of these are realistic possibilities and in the case of the last one the Amish are beneficiaries of a special exemption that is in the talks to be repealed. They already make many concessions and interact with industrial society more than Ted envisioned.

[Anonymous No.21495652]

>>21495303
explain how you think it's grammatically incorrect.

[Anonymous No.21495663]

>>21495635
yes, yes, these are activities that the states licenses an organisation to engage in, but the state can only withdraw such a licence, it cant prevent the collection of private peoples (the organisation) from engaging in these activities privately, nor can it pass legitimate judgement that possesses moral authority upon the moral worth of these activities. The Wacko Massacre is probably an interesting case point, but as you’re probably aware the very fabric of our society has been wrapped around this dilemma since history began

[Anonymous No.21495668]

>>21495635
btw I’m merely taking your point with the Amish in isolation, not in relation to what Ted envisioned, i would agree with you as your point stands in relation to what Ted envisioned, but i think on it’s own it’s not proper to say the Amish have no power per se

[Anonymous No.21495675]

>>21495630
Retarded bait

[Anonymous No.21495695]

>>21495668
>>21495663
I agree with most of your point. A useful thing to keep in mind would be this:
>197. Some people take the line that modern man has too much power, too much control over nature; they argue for a more passive attitude on the part of the human race. At best these people are expressing themselves unclearly because they fail to distinguish between power for LARGE ORGANIZATIONS and power for INDIVIDUALS and SMALL GROUPS. It is a mistake to argue for powerlessness and passivity, because people NEED power. Modern man as a collective entity — that is, the industrial system — has immense power over nature, and we (FC) regard this as evil. But modern INDIVIDUALS and SMALL GROUPS OP INDIVIDUALS have far less power than primitive man ever did. Generally speaking, the vast power of “modern man” over nature is exercised not by individuals or small groups but by large organizations. To the extent that the average modern INDIVIDUAL can wield the power of technology, he is permitted to do so only within narrow limits and only under the supervision and control of the system. (You need a license for everything and with the license come rules and regulations.) The individual has only those technological powers with which the system chooses to provide him. His PERSONAL power over nature is slight.
>198. Primitive INDIVIDUALS and SMALL GROUPS actually had considerable power over nature; or maybe it would be better to say power WITHIN nature. When primitive man needed food he knew how to find and prepare edible roots, how to track game and take it with homemade weapons. He knew how to protect himself from heat cold, rain, dangerous animals, etc. But primitive man did relatively little damage to nature because the COLLECTIVE power of primitive society was negligible compared to the COLLECTIVE power of industrial society.
>199. Instead of arguing for powerlessness and passivity, one should argue that the power of the INDUSTRIAL SYSTEM should be broken, and that this will greatly INCREASE the power and freedom of INDIVIDUALS and SMALL GROUPS.
Large organizations are those that have a significant amount of control over the industrial infrastructure of society. I imagine that in the future the industrial system will become so efficient at enforcing its laws that people with be biologically incapable of disobedience, or this will be a normal day:
>Drones flying overhead spot WAGIE#0199201 growing illegal substance ID:TOMATO#23 (Natural, Carbon inefficient)
>HELLO WAGE#0199201 300USD HAVE BEEN DEDUCTED FROM YOUR KTID PASS.
>PLEASE REMOVE ILLEGAL SUBSTANCE OR A UNIT WILL BE DISPATCHED TO YOUR LOCATION
>OUR SYSTEMS HAVE DETECTED YOUR COVID-IMPLANT IS OT OF DATE. PLEASE REPORT TO YOUR NEAREST AMAZON CENTER
>This drone sponsored by the McDonald's Center. Try our new Neo-McBurger! BA-DA-DA-DA I'm lovin' it!

[Anonymous No.21495699]

>>21495630

[Anonymous No.21495731]

>>21495695
>>21495695

yeah, in relation to Ted’s thought i think there’s no way anyone could disagree with what you said.

> Large organizations are those that have a significant amount of control over the industrial infrastructure of society. I imagine that in the future the industrial system will become so efficient at enforcing its laws that people with be biologically incapable of disobedience, or this will be a normal day:
>Drones flying overhead spot WAGIE#0199201 growing illegal substance ID:TOMATO#23 (Natural, Carbon inefficient)
>HELLO WAGE#0199201 300USD HAVE BEEN DEDUCTED FROM YOUR KTID PASS.
>PLEASE REMOVE ILLEGAL SUBSTANCE OR A UNIT WILL BE DISPATCHED TO YOUR LOCATION
>OUR SYSTEMS HAVE DETECTED YOUR COVID-IMPLANT IS OUT OF DATE. PLEASE REPORT TO YOUR NEAREST AMAZON CENTER
>This drone sponsored by the McDonald's Center. Try our new Neo-McBurger! BA-DA-DA-DA I'm lovin' it!

holy kek, people wont even have a mode for disagreement, consumption will just become a surrogate activity for self affirmation...

[Anonymous No.21495816]

>>21495208
It’s a manifesto. It’s an outline of ideology, schmuck

[Anonymous No.21495836]

>>21493768
>That's why you have never read anything addressing his arguments directly.

It's pretty similar with Chomsky and Herman, I've never heard of anyone actually trying to dispute any of the arguments given in Manufacturing Consent, so it's pretty reasonable to presume it's mostly correct in spite of all the attempted slander.

[Anonymous No.21495892]

>amish people have power
i'll have what you're smoking

[Anonymous No.21495907]

>>21495892

[Anonymous No.21495913]

Luddites are so fucking gay. At least leftists follow real analysis and have logical ideas for the future. Technology is just a tool.

[Anonymous No.21495941]

>>21495913
brainlet poster completely misses the point

[Anonymous No.21496023]

no ink on paper = no power

[Anonymous No.21496415]

>>21493049
Kirkpatrick Sale's critique is retarded and cringe. Nothing but labels and name calling, no cogent argument. Why could this be? Could it be Kirkpatrick sale is stupid? Yes. At the very least he's certainly not a top level mind like Kaczynski. A more likely explanation is provided by fear: Kirkpatrick was the leading "Luddite" writer of the time, and Kaczynski's writings certainly echoes his concerns. This was too close for comfort for Kirkpatrick, and in order to avoid public backlash for his own writing, and any suspected sympathies he might have for Kaczynski, he actively tried to distance himself from Kaczynski. In retrospect it makes Kirkpatrick look very pathetic.

At any rate Ted Kaczynski's writing is superb, logically airtight and extremely cogent. What's most striking is that his prose is comprehensively logical able to articulate complex ideas while at the same time extremely brief and simple, such that a more or less average IQ person can comprehend them.

Notice I said average IQ person. This does not apply to you, unfortunately. Unfortunately, you're are below the curve in that area. Your observation of Kaczynski's opening statement makes absolutely no sense. The Industrial Revolution has been a disaster for the human race. those things which can be seen as consequences of the Industrial Revolution but are not directly identified with it (as a historical process), have also been a disaster for the human race. He combines both ideas into one simple, elegant, and logically consistent opening sentence:

"The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race."

Powerful, true, logical, concise, and further expanded on in detail in the manifesto. The perfect opening statement for the manifesto.

[Anonymous No.21496421]

>>21495487
You’re fucking retarded. But that’s expected from someone who seriously values industrial society.

[Anonymous No.21496424]

>>21495913
You're retarded. Your "real analysis" and "logical ideas" are a silly conceit. All the works of the Marxist and leftist theorists get cut down by one theoretical and logically argued books by Kaczynski: "Anti-Tech Revolution: Why and How".

You should read it sometime.

[Anonymous No.21496434]

>>21496415
>>21496424
based bigbrane

[Anonymous No.21496509]

>>21495913
>Technology is just a tool.
Technological progress can't be controlled

[Anonymous No.21496530]

>>21493049
>>The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
Probably the most KINO line written in modern times

[Anonymous No.21496893]

>>21493049
He wrote it like it was an academic paper. His "style" is standard academic writing meant to delineate causes and effects, not entertain.
>Isn't a disaster also a consequence? This sentence is weird and not very inviting. A strange way to introduce your big statement to the world.
You're a poor reader and an even worse writer.

>>21495573
If the biggest problem is to get people to recognize there's a problem, that's where you start.

>>21495663
>it cant prevent the collection of private peoples (the organisation) from engaging in these activities privately
It most certainly can. Building codes are not a "I'm a private individual so I can do what I want" kind of thing, for example.

>>21495695
Kek! It's funny now but it probably won't be in 50 to 90 years.

[Anonymous No.21497100]

>>21493049
>Isn't disaster also a consequence
You're dumb
That said, the word "disaster" really ruins the sentence. It's like he thought out each word except for that one. What a boring choice. It purges the line of its weight.

[Anonymous No.21497149]

>>21493049
>Isn't a disaster also a consequence? This sentence is weird and not very inviting. A strange way to introduce your big statement to the world.
you are either braindead or obtuse on purpose

[Anonymous No.21497403]

>>21496415
>his prose is comprehensively logical able to articulate complex ideas while at the same time extremely brief and simple
Like how he fails to define what "the system" is and ends up admitting in a standalone article or letter that he doesn't have a good definition for it but everyone should have a good intuition of what it's supposed to mean or some bullshit like that

[Anonymous No.21498943]

>>21497403
brainlet moment

[Anonymous No.21498972]

That freedom can not exist without permissiveness. Otherwise freedom is meaningless and not actually freedom, like free-speech without the ability to offend. He makes a distinction that his idea of freedom is ability to partake in the power process, which I agree with to some extent. But he makes it clear to separate it from a permissive outlook. This I do not think is possible. One must be tolerant and/or permissive to value freedom as he does.

Personally I don't agree with his definition of freedom, it neglects to mention obligation, duty and hierarchy. All of which I think are necessary for people to live happily. He approaches this problem as a man with high-IQ, so far removed from the average people that he can not possible equate his mental experiences with that of the average man. His solution may apply to the peaks of society but not to the common masses.

[Anonymous No.21499256]

>>21498972
This is probably the only quality critique of Kaczynski I've seen.

[Anonymous No.21499282]

>>21499256
Can you provide anything to help resolve it? It was partly from that, and other issues, that i gravitated towards National-Socialism. Specifically the idealized, and easily obtained society laid out in the book i linked. I have other problems with his writing and thought, but this one is amongst the core.

[Anonymous No.21499304]

>>21499282
Currently on my phone. I've been reading some works related to the nature of freedom as well as the role of the state, and I don't want to discuss the topic in depth without knowing what I'm talking about.

[Anonymous No.21499793]

>>21498972
Download link?

[Anonymous No.21499913]

>>21499793
>Go to Archive.org
>Search a New Nobility Of Blood and Soil
>Click on the one that looks like it
>On the right side of the screen select download as pdf

Away you go.

[Anonymous No.21499936]

>>21499793
As an example of why I keep shilling this >>21498972 book. Picrel is the opening quote from it by an author who no doubt inspired the author of the work.

[Anonymous No.21500491]

>>21495731
A question has to be asked of all these scientists and technologists pushing this madness and taking us all on a wildly reckless ride into the unknown. Are they criminals? Should they be punished?

[Anonymous No.21500493]

>>21500491
Glow. More.

[Anonymous No.21500494]

>>21495557
dude you must be 15 years old.

[Anonymous No.21500501]

>>21500493
Cower. More.

[Anonymous No.21500503]

>>21500501
When you leave your house at night the streetlamps turn off.

[Anonymous No.21500508]

>>21500503
answer the question

[Anonymous No.21500533]

>>21500508
They say cuckoos rob nightingales' nests.