/lit/ - Literature

>>12309128
>industrialized country

Well I am finishing to read this impressive work and I have a question. One one side he criticizes overpopulation, but on the other hand he predicts as one of the negative consequences of the industrial system that elites will promote a low birth rate until most humans extinguish, so isn’t that a contradiction? What’s better according to him, a high birth rate or a low birth rate?

Don't forget me, /lit/

Have the people who like this guy even read all his shit because I have a feeling they only read the manifesto.

I just finished Technological Slavery which is as repetive as it can posssibly be and sometimes cringe as fuck like when he mentions there was a road built on a plateau he liked or when he stopped and prayed at a lake, nevermind his whole shlick about human dignity.

>>11341043
>what is wrong with STEM?
Industrial society and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.

>>11325300
Ted?

Insane, radical, unoriginal, and overly self-righteous, but completely correct and written with a rather professional tone.

That's how I write. Am I gonna be the next Unabomber, anons?

>The world’s richest regions, such as North America and Europe, are not only increasing their forest area. They have more forests than they did prior to industrialization. The United Kingdom, for example, has more than tripled its forest area since 1919. The UK will soon reach forest levels equal to those registered in the Domesday Book, almost a thousand years ago.

>It is not just rich nations that are experiencing net reforestation. The “Environmental Kuznets curve” is an economic notion that suggests that economic development initially leads to environmental deterioration, but after a period of economic growth that degradation begins to reverse.

>Once nations hit, what Ridley dubs the “forest transition,” or approximately $4,500 GDP per capita, forest areas begin to increase. China, Russia, India, Vietnam and Bangladesh are just some of the nations that have hit this forest transition phase and are experiencing net afforestation.
Was he, dare I say it, wrong?

Are you oversocialized?

Reposting this cause the mods are soys. Kaczynski's Manifesto is philosophy you fucking nitwits. If we can post Baudrillard and Deleuze we can post Kaczynski.

Did you read his manifesto? Is he right about everything? Is technological society inherently toxic to the human spirit?

>Suppose you asked leftists to make a list of ALL the things that were wrong with society, and then suppose you instituted EVERY social change that they demanded. It is safe to say that within a couple of years the majority of leftists would find something new to complain about,some new social “evil” to correct; because, once again, the leftist is motivated less by distress at society’s ills than by the need to satisfy his drive for power by imposing his solutions on society
This man represented everything he hated.
Truly a psycho.

>Read Industrial Society and It's Future a while ago
>Just picked up Freud's Civilization and It's Discontents
> Kind of saying a lot of the same shit that Ted does only 60 years earlier
>Find it hard to believe that by how much Ted read he wouldn't have come across this semi-popular book at some point
>Should I think any lesser of Industrial Society and It's Future because it is quite possibly heavily influenced by Freud's book?
>Anyone ever feel like the lost respect for a book/author because they realized the book wasn't as original as you thought it was?

>he doesn't go to an ivy league school/oxbridge
What's your excuse? You're not retarded, are you?

>reads Heidegger twice

>he doesn't go to a prestigious Ivy League school
You might as well just kill yourself desu

ITT: when starting with the Greeks goes wrong.

Didn't Ted figure this all out decades ago?
I really doubt you could add any significant commentary on 4chan culture that wasn't explicitly implied or said in "Industrial Society".

Over the past few months I've seen a couple of people refer to Ted Kaczynski as a critic of the left (and as a social critic in general, to be sure). Reference is made to a particular quote:

>When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said about him (or about groups with whom he identifies) we conclude that he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem. This tendency is pronounced among minority rights advocates, whether or not they belong to the minority groups whose rights they defend. They are hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities ... Those who are most sensitive about "politically incorrect" terminology are not the average black ghetto-dweller, Asian immigrant, abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of whom do not even belong to any "oppressed" group but come from privileged strata of society. Political correctness has its stronghold among university professors, who have secure employment with comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual, white males from middle-class families

Ted Kaczynski cites, for his analysis, Eric Hoffer's conception of a 'true believer'. Eric Hoffer, the American philosopher who prefered to be referred to as a longshoreman (guy who throws ropes and shit around boats), characterized the true believer as a particular person who follows a movement with a strong degree of conviction. He emphasized the following characteristics of the true believer:

>Identifying with a group and identifying personal achievement with the achievement of the movement.

People will, of course, have varying reasons for this: Hoffer cites as examples ethnic groups which struggle to assimilate, the chronically bored, unsuccessful people of all shades (particularly artists); Essentially, those who feel worthless and who feel their lives are meaningless.

>A tendency to focus the locus of control outside the self.

There are many levels to this, such as the need to demonize the toxic present and to glorify the prestigious past, the need for a devil (even in the absence of a God), the notion that their lives are irremediably spoiled and they must strive to correct whatever ills they perceive.

>I will finish what you started

Let's talk manifestos, /lit/. I'm currently reading Ted Kaczynski's and he's got some interesting ideas. What are some good manifestos to read?