Opinion on Ted Kaczynski?

[retard_supreme0]

I've never seen him mentioned on this forum, but he's a popular name among the extreme and reactionary right. For the unaware, Ted was a terrorist in the 90s that published a manifesto calling for the end of technological progression and a return to nature. His case was essentially that modern life deprived humans of their natural hunter-gatherer power cycles; that industry and agriculture had reduced inherently meaningful goals such as gathering food and staying sheltered to triviality, and that being a interchangeable cog in an industrial machine for survival replaced a life of pragmatic problem-solving and collaboration with that of endless tedium with only simulated positive feedback.

I'd say that this phenomenon of the removal of man from his own nature is easily observable in our own time. Compare the quiet, rural countryside, where most grow their own food or run their own service, to the sprawling cityscapes where most live in a shoebox and stare at a computer doing mundane tasks for a living. The rise of nihlism, rejection of authority & society, hedonism, and perversion that we all know all too well certainly isn't taking place in the former. It's fair to say that modernity itself is a product of the cities; the people within them living ten years ahead of us, sampling the rot that will soon diffuse elsewhere.

Interpretations of his views vary, but Ted himself would probably line up well with most of this forum. The modernity that has subjugated humanity and deprived it of any meaning is a phenomenon of the last few centuries. He didn't necessarily advocate for return to hunter-gatherer or pre-agricultural times. Rather, perhaps, that we cannot be so shortsighted, that a strong authority must keep the nature of man in mind before such radical change as technological progression is allowed to take place.

I truly believe that Kaczynski's ideas will have at least some influence in the future. Our current lazes-faire principles of free markets, liberty, and democracy are largely the culprits of the conditions humanity now faces, and they are far from immutable. Perhaps it's only a matter of time before they draw serious criticism.

 

[Aziz]

Based and blackpilled

 

[SchrodingersDick]

100% right about everything. Should not be in prison.

 

[Yerberito]

His vision of society is interesting, according to him Progress has been a disaster for humanity, He was an intelligent anarchist tbh

 

[Deleted member 15737]

Ted is probably one of the smartest men alive but born in the wrong time.

 

[Deleted member 23656]

He was based and redpilled.

Especially on j*urnalists

 

[HowCanSheSlap]

Wasn't he an anarchist? I can remember coming across him bak in 2013/2014. Giga IQ maths professor.

What he's saying isn't too different from what others have said. I got the impression he was parroting a lot of Nietzsche and Max Stirner. He wasn't revolutionary in new thinking about modernity per se, but he was one of the only one to take these ideas and do something about it i.e. kill people.

He was based and redpilled.

Especially on j*urnalists

View attachment 181488

Based.

 

[Ellsworth]

Read Technological Slavery ASAP if you haven’t already.

 

[retard_supreme0]

Wasn't he an anarchist? I can remember coming across him bak in 2013/2014. Giga IQ maths professor.

What he's saying isn't too different from what others have said. I got the impression he was parroting a lot of Nietzsche and Max Stirner. He wasn't revolutionary in new thinking about modernity per se, but he was one of the only one to take these ideas and do something about it i.e. kill people.


Based.

Anarchism isn't reactionary in the slightest; I don't recall any mention of it in his writings.

 

[Dionysus]

100% right about everything. Should not be in prison.

 

[Ricecel X]

Hello FBI!

Ted was ahead of his time, and called out leftists for the societal rot they produce.

Most city dwellers can relate to his writings on displacement activities, which are activities done in lieu of meeting basic survival needs. Instead of hunting animals or gathering fruits and nuts, we're working jobs so we can procure basic needs.

 

[Joker]

100% right about everything. Should not be in prison.

he was ahead of his time, truly

 

[Deleted member 16608]

Based and a hero. He was victimized by the University system and warranted in his revenge. He was basically MK-Ultrad and Henry Murray violated him and pushed him to bombing. I should write him in prison. Heard he replies to everyone.

 

[retard_supreme0]

Bump

 

[mericks]

Wasn't he a victim of some cold-war era CIA experiment to see if they could drive a man to violence by subtly torturing him? Or something like that, I can't remember exactly. Anyways, I think it's really unfair that he's being held responsible but not the glow-in-the-darks who were fucking with him with the specific intention of inciting violent behavior.

 

[NoCopeNoHope]

Uncle Ted is a very intelligent man, and he was correct about the rot that uncontrolled technological progress spreads onto humanity. What I think he got wrong was the idea that technology itself is the cause, and that we should go back to a time before the industrial revolution. We must understand that technology only amplifies human nature. It doesn't not, and cannot, change it. Technology is a form of manifestation of human thought. "Progress" could mean Tinder and social media, or it could mean modern medicine and basic inventions like the use of fire or the wheel. IIRC, Ted makes no real distinctions between these in his manifesto. The industrial revolution has given the vast majority, if not every living human, a markedly better material quality of life than before. Hunger and disease, while they are still issues in the modern world, are not the great issues they once were.

I don't believe we can go back, nor do I believe it is possible to go back. We need to evolve beyond the human nature he speaks of in his work. In the same way we evolved beyond chimps and bonobos, we must evolve to surpass previous iterations of humanity, including the current version. Human nature must evolve to fit this new environment. We can't be beholden to our current nature.

 

[SchrodingersDick]

Wasn't he a victim of some cold-war era CIA experiment to see if they could drive a man to violence by subtly torturing him? Or something like that, I can't remember exactly. Anyways, I think it's really unfair that he's being held responsible but not the glow-in-the-darks who were fucking with him with the specific intention of inciting violent behavior.

Cope. His ideas are solid and his method of propagating them is also solid. There isn’t some need for his CPU to be fucked up. What he did was very rational. You have earth shattering info that everybody needs to know and the only way to get it to them is to blow people up. A few dead people killed for the greater good vs making the manifesto visible to millions of people.

people are killed for the greater good all the time, and nobody bats an eye. The only difference here is that ted’s interests did not coincide with the interests of the government so they label him “bad”. This was not a government sanctioned greater good and the people killed were not deemed by the government to be bad guys or necessary casualties.

people only view ted to be a bad guy because they’re low IQ and because the government says so. And the government is more capable of violence than any other entity, so what they say goes.

Buuuuuuut I don’t know if it’s even possible to destroy the system and I’m sure he knows this. You’d have to destroy every square inch of the industrialized world, in every country, so it’s not salvageable. Cause it’s like a seed, if it exists In any small part anywhere, it will propagate itself to take over the world again. You’d need a new ted kaczynski every couple hundred years to come along, mail some bombs, and start a revolution that destroys the system. Eventually the tech system will grow big enough without a revolution and will become too big to destroy, at which point it will wreck havoc on humans and other life.

 

[PPEcel]

What really shocks me about Kaczynski is the fact that he IQmogs everyone here combined. @Anonymous MG what do you think?

He graduated from high school at 15 and got a full ride to Harvard. Then he went to Michigan, did his PhD in some incredibly obscure field of mathematics, and started teaching at Berkeley right after. Everyone knew he was high IQ, he would probably be a prominent academicel today if he didn't become an anarcho-primitivist nutjob.

 

[SchrodingersDick]

Uncle Ted is a very intelligent man, and he was correct about the rot that uncontrolled technological progress spreads onto humanity. What I think he got wrong was the idea that technology itself is the cause, and that we should go back to a time before the industrial revolution. We must understand that technology only amplifies human nature. It doesn't not, and cannot, change it. Technology is a form of manifestation of human thought. "Progress" could mean Tinder and social media, or it could mean modern medicine and basic inventions like the use of fire or the wheel. IIRC, Ted makes no real distinctions between these in his manifesto. The industrial revolution has given the vast majority, if not every living human, a markedly better material quality of life than before. Hunger and disease, while they are still issues in the modern world, are not the great issues they once were.

I don't believe we can go back, nor do I believe it is possible to go back. We need to evolve beyond the human nature he speaks of in his work. In the same way we evolved beyond chimps and bonobos, we must evolve to surpass previous iterations of humanity, including the current version. Human nature must evolve to fit this new environment. We can't be beholden to our current nature.

The new environment is an artificial one. When you say we need to evolve, I think what you mean is that we need to become better adapted to the technological systems. I.e. we exist to serve the system and not the other way around. The better adapted you are to one environment, the less adapted you are to any other environment. If the technological system necessarily destroys itself, humans will be fucked as they will be less fit to survive in a natural world. What is the end goal of the technological system anyways? Eventually earth will be uninhabitable and humans will go extinct. Whatever artificial system we create should exist to serve us (duh, since were the creators and we act in self interest), and even then there are unforeseen negative consequences that you can’t do away with. The modern world really just seems Iike a massive runaway do-nothing machine that keeps getting bigger, more divergent from human nature, and more difficult to adapt to.. and we can’t get rid of it since we’re too adapted and dependent on it.

just for perspective, the modern world requires 20+ years of schooling/adaptation just to have a chance at surviving and thriving in this environment. People used to have families by the age of college graduation.

also, there’s no need to go back to brutal hunter gatherer days. Just small, primitively developed communities with much less technology is just as good as what we have today.

 

[NoCopeNoHope]

The new environment is an artificial one.

One could say the same thing when agriculture was starting to become popular and fire was "discovered".

I think what you mean is that we need to become better adapted to the technological systems.

Minor correction. Technological environments.

The better adapted you are to one environment, the less adapted you are to any other environment.

Humans, via technological progress, have gone from being prayed on by lions on the savannas of Africa to actively preserving them in zoos and wildlife sanctuaries to protect them from extinction. We have gone from being pray to living on an entirely different plane of existence in just 20k years. Thanks to tech. Compare where we were 100k years ago to today.

If the technological system necessarily destroys itself, humans will be fucked as they will be less fit to survive in a natural world.

This destruction will not happen. Knowledge loss of this level has no possibility of occurring, baring some black swan style event that results in the destruction of 99% of human life. Such an event would likely wreck the planet's biosphere and render Earth inhospitable for complex life.

What is the end goal of the technological system anyways?

Unknown tbh. Conquering the universe? Making billions of 10/10 gigastacy virgin foids with anime girl personalities? Idk.

Eventually earth will be uninhabitable and humans will go extinct.

This will happen anyways naturally. The Sun will transform into a red giant in 5 billion years turn Earth into Mercury. There is also the possibility of getting hit by a pulsar burst or hit by an asteroid, similar to the dinosaurs. Its better to progress and move off of Earth than it is to sit here and wait for the universe to kill us. The dinos lived 65 million years ago, and then several tens of millions before that. They didn't adapt fast enough.

The modern world really just seems Iike a massive runaway do-nothing machine that keeps getting bigger, more divergent from human nature, and more difficult to adapt to.. and we can’t get rid of it since we’re too adapted and dependent on it.

Because there is no central direction. We haven't fully adapted to the level of technology we have available to us yet. See foids and social media for a perfect example of this. Tech is increasing so rapidly nowadays that the average human will go through several generations of tech, unable to fully master any single one of them. Think of boomers, who in their youth, computers took whole buildings. Now they fit on your wrist.

just for perspective, the modern world requires 20+ years of schooling/adaptation just to have a chance at surviving and thriving in this environment. People used to have families by the age of college graduation.

Indeed. And chimps usually have children when most humans are going through elementary school. This is an issue with the biological limits of our species, one that will hopefully be solved. The agepill will one day be defeated.

also, there’s no need to go back to brutal hunter gatherer days. Just small, primitively developed communities with much less technology is just as good as what we have today.

Without industrial society, there is no modern medicine, clean water, or distributed food supply. All it would take is one bad season to kill you. Although tbh I don't know how primitive you want to go. Could you specify a decade?

 

[Barnacle]

He is 100% right because he also was an insider.
You should watch the documentary called "Das Netzwerk" from Lutz Dammberg, a real eyeopener. Don't worry it's in english.

 

[Gymcelled]

He is 100% right because he also was an insider.
You should watch the documentary called "Das Netzwerk" from Lutz Dammberg, a real eyeopener. Don't worry it's in english.

What is it about though

 

[Barnacle]

What is it about though

About the rise of cybernetics and mind-control though technology. It centers around the Unabombers ideas and actuallys shows him in a positive light despite the movie being more or less mainstream and not an obscure "far-right" production.

 

[lifefuel]

The only thing I would say is you don't have to throw the baby out with the bathwater but yeah there needs to be a lot of change and scaling down of society.

Also his brother did him dirty. I'm glad he refuses to speak to him.

It was his brother's wife that pushed him to snitch. He's a megacuck

 

[Sportbro]

Just go insane in the woods theory
He was high IQ but they did some crazy expiriment on him and from there things went down

 

[BlackpilledRetard]

He was probably right about everything. Probably once we're all dead, they are going to implement a Chinese-style social control grid in first world countries. Except instead of automatically fining you for jaywalking, the system will automatically venmo $20 to any female you check out (from your own bank of course)

 

[Deleted member 22749]

Uncle Ted is a very intelligent man, and he was correct about the rot that uncontrolled technological progress spreads onto humanity. What I think he got wrong was the idea that technology itself is the cause, and that we should go back to a time before the industrial revolution. We must understand that technology only amplifies human nature. It doesn't not, and cannot, change it. Technology is a form of manifestation of human thought. "Progress" could mean Tinder and social media, or it could mean modern medicine and basic inventions like the use of fire or the wheel. IIRC, Ted makes no real distinctions between these in his manifesto. The industrial revolution has given the vast majority, if not every living human, a markedly better material quality of life than before. Hunger and disease, while they are still issues in the modern world, are not the great issues they once were.

I don't believe we can go back, nor do I believe it is possible to go back. We need to evolve beyond the human nature he speaks of in his work. In the same way we evolved beyond chimps and bonobos, we must evolve to surpass previous iterations of humanity, including the current version. Human nature must evolve to fit this new environment. We can't be beholden to our current nature.

Agreed.

Ted was a little blue pilled about human nature. Despite killing people, he was actually blue pilled on human nature. Unfortunately humans are too primitive for any of his theories to be practical. He genuinely saw that humans are going down the wrong path and did what he did in an effort to save humanity.

We are already seeing the negative effects of technology with the likes of tinder and social media destroying the dating landscape completely as one example. I think Ted will become relevant when it's too late. Once technology has evolved to the point where AI is taking up most of the jobs (as he predicted) and AI is becoming humanlike, we will see drastic changes as the elite realize that they can cull humanity and maintain the status quo on earth using the AI that has been developed.

 

[Deleted member 22999]

af

 

[Deleted member 23656]

The only thing I would say is you don't have to throw the baby out with the bathwater but yeah there needs to be a lot of change and scaling down of society.

Also his brother did him dirty. I'm glad he refuses to speak to him.

You can truly feel the anger of someone who feels betrayed by his own brother.

 

[RickyFitts]

Based and a hero. He was victimized by the University system and warranted in his revenge. He was basically MK-Ultrad and Henry Murray violated him and pushed him to bombing. I should write him in prison. Heard he replies to everyone.

cucks are trying to prevent him from communicating with the outside world. You might not get an answer

View attachment 181623
View attachment 181624
View attachment 181625
View attachment 181626
View attachment 181627

You can truly feel the anger of someone who feels betrayed by his own brother.

based. Too brutal and blunt

 

[Anonymous MG]

What really shocks me about Kaczynski is the fact that he IQmogs everyone here combined. @Anonymous MG what do you think?

He graduated from high school at 15 and got a full ride to Harvard. Then he went to Michigan, did his PhD in some incredibly obscure field of mathematics, and started teaching at Berkeley right after. Everyone knew he was high IQ, he would probably be a prominent academicel today if he didn't become an anarcho-primitivist nutjob.

He is certainly more intelligent than anyone else on this forum, of course a genius like him would IQ mog most everyone on the site. Though I don't believe that his way of thinking is most practical, nor do I necessarily believe that technology is the reasoning behind humanity's sufferings.

Notice how the industrial revolution is most often referenced (and I'm referring to general primitivism) in the sense that that is the cutoff is the industrial revolution where humanity reached a point where it descended into some hellscape that deprives the human mind of its natural environment.

I disagree, what we're experiencing right now are the "growing pains" of technology so to speak, the problems we're experiencing right now are also a result of moralistic views we've retained that don't fit modern society. Don't you find it odd how humanity decided to keep a majority of Christain values in the modern era, whilst they just add whatever they want to on their own? You can't apply views formed 1000s of years ago with the technology of modern society, such as the idea that we can't do genetic testing on human beings, are outdated views formed due to the "special" value every human life supposedly has.

No, all this is going to get better. Some few decades down the line, we'll have machines to free us from a monotonous hell of work. Everything job will be automated, every human would receive the care and affection they need, and we'd have our own form of "soma" that can help us maintain consistent and constant euphoria. Everyone would be fulfilled, nobody would experience misery.

 

[Deleted member 22749]

View attachment 181623
View attachment 181624
View attachment 181625
View attachment 181626
View attachment 181627

You can truly feel the anger of someone who feels betrayed by his own brother.

He has a great way of communicating and getting his point across.

Whether you agree with his manifesto or not, everyone agrees that it was very well written.

I didn't know that he had basically ceased all bombing attacks once the manifesto was released. I believe him when he says that.

.

No, all this is going to get better. Some few decades down the line, we'll have machines to free us from a monotonous hell of work. Everything job will be automated, every human would receive the care and affection they need, and we'd have our own form of "soma" that can help us maintain consistent and constant euphoria. Everyone would be fulfilled, nobody would experience misery.

Bluepilled as fk

.
174. On the other hand it is possible that human controlover the machines may be retained. In that case the average man may have control over certain private machines of his own, such as his car or his personal computer, but control over large systems of machines will be in the hands of a tiny elite — just as it is today, but with two differences. Due to improved techniques the elite will have greater control over the masses; and because human work will no longer be necessary the masses will be superfluous, a useless burden on the system. If the elite is ruthless they may simply decide to exterminate the mass of humanity. If they are humane they may use propaganda or other psychological or biological techniques to reduce the birth rate until the mass of humanity becomes extinct, leaving the world to the elite. Or, if the elite consists of soft-hearted liberals, they may decide to play the role of good shepherds to the rest of the human race. They will see to it that everyone’s physical needs are satisfied, that all children are raised under psychologically hygienic conditions, that everyone has a wholesome hobby to keep him busy, and that anyone who may become dissatisfied undergoes “treatment” to cure his “problem.” Of course, life will be so purposeless that people will have to be biologically or psychologically engineered either to remove their need for the power process or to make them “sublimate” their drive for power into some harmless hobby. These engineered human beings may be happy in such a society, but they most certainly will not be free. They will have been reduced to the status of domestic animals.

 

[NoCopeNoHope]

I wonder if it eats at his brother, or he fee
Big wrong, it's only going to get worse, and become a dystopian hellhole where there's billions and billions of excess people with no purpose for living.

Humans have never had a purpose for living. Life has no meaning beyond what meaning we give it. The issue is that the average person is an NPC with little to no will to power.

 

[Speed]

Is it me or does he not look that bad prior to sperging out in the woods?

https://www.history.com/.image/c_limit%2Ccs_srgb%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_700/MTU3OTM5MTQ2NDQ1MzAxMzk0/ted_kaczynski_harvard_g-594372140.webp

 

[The Abyss]

Unabomber was right.

 

[Opus132]

Highly intelligent and i agree with a lot of what he says in his manifesto but i disagree with his fundamentally atheistic primitivism. I don't think human beings were meant to live "natural" lives at all (even primitive societies in Africa live in communities and possess a culture) and i don't believe meaning lies only in the struggle for survival.

If you look at pre-modern cultures, we see that man's relationship to nature is ambivalent. On one hand, traditional societies lived "off" the land so to speak and had a close relationship with nature, but at the same time nature was regarded with fear and not merely respect, as a place in which man did not really fully belong. The other aspect that was common in ancient society was religion, from which "meaning" was actually derived.

I don't see how the "struggle" for survival adds any meaning when you have already devalued life to begin with. If the purpose of life is to "exist", i don't see the difference whether there is "struggle" or not. Life is pointless in either case, who cares whether you have to fight for your existence or not?

 

[The Abyss]

He is certainly more intelligent than anyone else on this forum, of course a genius like him would IQ mog most everyone on the site. Though I don't believe that his way of thinking is most practical, nor do I necessarily believe that technology is the reasoning behind humanity's sufferings.

Notice how the industrial revolution is most often referenced (and I'm referring to general primitivism) in the sense that that is the cutoff is the industrial revolution where humanity reached a point where it descended into some hellscape that deprives the human mind of its natural environment.

I disagree, what we're experiencing right now are the "growing pains" of technology so to speak, the problems we're experiencing right now are also a result of moralistic views we've retained that don't fit modern society. Don't you find it odd how humanity decided to keep a majority of Christain values in the modern era, whilst they just add whatever they want to on their own? You can't apply views formed 1000s of years ago with the technology of modern society, such as the idea that we can't do genetic testing on human beings, are outdated views formed due to the "special" value every human life supposedly has.

No, all this is going to get better. Some few decades down the line, we'll have machines to free us from a monotonous hell of work. Everything job will be automated, every human would receive the care and affection they need, and we'd have our own form of "soma" that can help us maintain consistent and constant euphoria. Everyone would be fulfilled, nobody would experience misery.

Those in control won't allow us to sit around not working once robots can do the majority of work. They will have us all killed, you think these ppl will let us sit by enjoying ourselves; draining the resources? Cold hearted ppl that wouldn't even share their piss with you for a drink.

 

[Deleted member 20659]

Extremely based and high IQ. This documentary is great btw

 

[Murdoch89]

THE ORIGINAL hERo

 

[Deleted member 21230]

One of the highest IQ humanity has ever had

 

[LOLI BREEDING]

he's based but I don't think we can fight the system, especially not in the way he proposes. we can only flee it and watch it collapse. I don't think he started bombing because they leveled his favorite forest but rather it was incel rage. would he have sent random people bombs if he'd had a loving wife and kids?
I wish he'd write something interesting again. he had 25 years to do it
@Fearofeight @JohnnySalami

 

[Deleted member 19546]

I don't think he started bombing because they leveled his favorite forest but rather it was incel rage. would he have sent random people bombs if he'd had a loving wife and kids?

Of course, but he wanted to portray himself as a logical, calculative and pragmatic activist rather than a virgin who let his emotions get the best of him.

 

[Emba]

Unfortunately... The majority of RURAL PEOPLE DO NOT grow their own food! Yeah some have gardens and livestock and hunt/fish, but certainly not like the early 1900's.

Other than that flawed perception - life in the country is easy food gathering - i find no fault in the Luddite concepts mentioned in this post.

 

[Mainländer]

I enjoyed reading his book a lot and agree with most of things written there.

 

[universallyabhorred]

Psycho chad, women are attracted to him. Some roastie I once DM'd on Discord was admiring him and obsessing over him, while she looked down on Elliot Rodger with contempt.

 

[Romello Gaghan 2]

Based and I like him a lot but he was very naive. His philosophy will never, ever go mainstream, that I can pretty much promise.

 

[Deleted member 22907]

based but I personally would never be anprim

 

[Deleted member 4159]

Technology favors the rulers, not the people. Wars back then were winnable because both sides just had cannons and men with rifles.

 

[CursedSurrogate]

He was right.

 

[Deleted member 250]

Way ahead of his time, reminds me a little bit of Ledger’s Joker