3 ms·
It’s a prescient manifesto by Ted Kaczynski (an MKUltra’ed domestic terrorist). I often show it to friends who doubt that todays state of mass manipulation and
by cjbgkagh 4y ago
It’s a prescient manifesto by Ted Kaczynski (an MKUltra’ed domestic terrorist). I often show it to friends who doubt that todays state of mass manipulation and over socialization could have been predicted.
I highly recommend reading it. His killing people to get it published put me off reading it, but a friend recommended it so I relented. I found it a good read.
I should point out that the consequence he was warning about was being made into a techno serf and that the danger was so great that it was worth abandoning technological comforts to prevent it.
- micromacrofoot 4y agoYou’re seriously recommending the manifesto of an anarchist that lived in a cabin in the woods without running water and sent dozens of mail bombs to innocent people? Come on, you can’t find something to support your ideas that doesn’t help glorify random murders?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- cjbgkagh 4y agoI am recommending it. He is clearly a smart person. If it was the ravings of a lunatic I would not. He is not a random murderer, he was psychologically tortured by the government as part of MKUltra before he killed anyone.
- UmbertoNoEco 4y agoYou just need to get on with the times. To read somebody now, you must: A) Be sure that whatever they wrote you agree 100% with. B) That person must share your full worldview and must have a pristine moral reputation. Anything else is dangerous, wrong and frankly subversive so I dont mind if you get punished by violating these simple principles.
- micromacrofoot 4y agothere’s a very wide chasm between “don’t agree with an opinion” and “serial murderer” you’re talking about the unabomber like he’s a victim of cancel culture instead of a guy that killed 3 people and maimed a dozen more
- UmbertoNoEco 4y agoI've read books or articles by far worse people. Reading != morally approving the character of the author. Even easier in this case when the content is very interesting and relevant and the criminal author is not getting any revenue from me reading his content.
- micromacrofoot 4y agoYeah this isn’t reading it though, this is going online and praising a serial killer. Imagine a loved one dies from a mail bomb and someone online says “yeah but he made a good point tho”
- paskozdilar 4y agoYou're seriously trying to censor one of the most influential anarcho-primitivists in the world, on the basis that talking about his work somehow "glorifies random murders"? Talk about oversocialization.
- micromacrofoot 4y agohe killed several people and tried to blow up an airplane… I’m saying maybe find literally any other person to support an idea
- paskozdilar 4y agoI don't support his murders in the least. He is rightfully locked up. I just think some of his ideas are interesting. I see ideas as entities separate from humans - one human can have many ideas and one idea can be had by many humans. The ideas would be the same even if someone else wrote them down.
- micromacrofoot 4y agoIf you spend a few minutes looking you’ll find that many other people have written them down, even pre unabomber. His manifesto is popular because he blew people up, not because he was an original thinker.
- paskozdilar 4y agoI honestly don't understand your reasoning. Is it somehow immoral to talk about murderers, or about what they wrote? If so, why?
- Solarsail 4y agoIsn't it rather precedented to do this? In most readings (that I've seen, anecdotally) of Timothy McVeigh's writings, or Hitler's Mein Kamph, people read these works specifically in the framing of a path to the atrocities, rather than in erstwhile debate of normative claims.