Is he right?

[Anonymous No.22636114]

>In essence, the ecofascists want a planned society, which means quite simply that they are socialists, for the fundamental idea of socialism is that of the planned society.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/ted-kaczynski-ecofascism-an-aberrant-branch-of-leftism

[Anonymous No.22636133]

>>22636114
>rambles about raycists, rejects white identity, and advocates globohomo ONE RACE DA MUTT RACE
lmao is that the guy you faggots dicksuck endlessly?

[Anonymous No.22636142]

>>22636133
Are you that desperate to earn your 0.2 per reply, you trannie? Holy shit, what a life.

(here have some, you pleb)

[Anonymous No.22636179]

>>22636114
>Is he right?
No. There are ecofascists who don't want a planned society, there are socialists who don't want a planned society, and there are planned society adherents who are not socialists.

[Anonymous No.22636190]

>The illusion of the planned society originated in the Enlightenment, when certain philosophers, misled by the successful application of scientific rationality to the physical world, imagined that scientific rationality could be applied with equal success to the development of human societies. This illusion should long since have been dispelled by what we have learned since the 18th century; but the leftists of today, including the ecofascists, persist in clinging to it.
How does he presume to limit the use of technology if not through the artificial powers of planned societies? An unplanned society will surely have rogue agents who use technology for their own benefit, just like the China vs. America analogy he just used a couple paragraphs later.

[Anonymous No.22636192]

>>22636133
>People dont agree with me on everything....
>So people must be wrong... about EVERYTHING!
On Heinrich Himmler Ill chuck you in an oven you fat retard

[Anonymous No.22636223]

>>22636114
Just give some big forests to people like Ted and tell them to stay there and live on their own.

[Anonymous No.22636319]

>>22636114
He sounds good on paper, and I was taken with his thoughts for a time, but to look at it critically one can see the flaws.
Does he genuinely believe that every last person on Earth will turn to a primitive lifestyle, even knowing that it will see the majority of their number perish from food scarcity, because one man said that it was not so very good for the environment?
Invariably not, which is why most discussion around his school of thought concerns ecoterrorism. Even then, if anarchist ecoterrorists, not among the most organised ogfgroups, miraculously manage to destroy enough infrastructure to trigger a global collapse, what then for the extensive human infrastructure and development which presently exists?
Will the anarcho-primitivism fairy disappear it, along with the immense banks of recorded knowledge of all our progress to this point?
If not, there will exist groups who possess the remnants of this old technology, or rediscover it, and through its usage gain dominion over those who do not - ultimately leading to a resurgence of the societies he scorned, changed though they will be, which through their access to preserved knowledge will return to modernity faster than before.
This process would occur even in a supernatural scenario where all technology and its knowledge were wiped from the Earth, albeit slower. Dozens of millenia ago, we carried spears and danced around fires, and yet we now sit at computers and drive cars.
Does he intend for a 20,000 year cycle of mankind discovering technology, becoming diminished through its usage, inventing anarcho-primitivism, and utterly destroying global society to
People buy into his ideas because it presents a quick fix to problems which seem monoloithic and unchallengable for the individual.
Destroying modern society because it is flawed is a much more cathartic - not to mention comprehensible - idea than the detailed process of solving innumerable issues and problems through lasting reform that would accompany actual change.

Also of course, when approaching the subject of Anarcho-primitivism, you can't look beyond picrel
>But he wasn't doing true anarcho-primiti-
He was the closest we've gotten so far, and thus Year Zero is the best real life example to draw from when considering the application of anarcho-primitivism on a societal scale.

[Anonymous No.22636445]

>>22636192
Yes, NPCs are wrong, and they are also retarded. Most of them ideas are based or supported by fallacies

[Anonymous No.22636558]

>>22636179
Dolt. They're all collectivists who want enforce particular behaviours.