4 ms·

What do you mean the future ? I hail my Ted as a hero on the right side of history now.

AnimalMuppet 4y ago
What's your threshold? How many innocent people does he have to kill and/or maim before you no longer are willing to consider him a hero? And yes, they were innocent. The one I met personally was a tech at the store where I bought my first computer. (And if you consider that enough to make him "not innocent", well, you're using a computer to read and comment here, so...) To me, he is condemned by his methods. If you're willing to deliberately, actively, persistently attempt to blow up innocent people, I can't trust your judgment on how people should interact with each other to make society better.
- Banana699 4y ago
  As indicated by your comment, you probably live/born in the US. So you probably have as a hero at least one of those 3 people : [George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt\Harry Truman]. Every one of those people killed far more than Ted ever ever dreamed of or imagined. One of them fought personally in wars of colonization and was responsible for the death of countless original inhabitants of the land his country stole, before leading the fighting in a war that, besides killing a hundred thousand person (in an era before humanity hit its first billion, 0.01% of the all humans dead in a single war), set in motion the ignition system for one of the bloodiest and most brutal revolution the world had seen at the time. The second one ignited the first industrial war in history, and brought a wave of destruction and death upon his own country so terrible its effects was felt, is felt, a century later and beyond. The third pair, among their many achievements, had developed a weapon of indescribable power, and unleashed it on a bunch of civilians to own a geopolitical enemy. That weapon remains a permanent guillotine over the head of civilization, patiently waiting for an executioner who will release it. If you hold any one of those people as a heros, no, if you hold any one of those people as anything less than the devil himself personified, then you already understand the fundamentals of what Ted had in mind when he did what he did, you merely disagree with his premises. Ted killed a measly sum of 3 people (according to my rusty memory of the wiki article I'm too lazy to re-read), this is laughable by the standards of a hero. Look at your own superhero movies, look at the sheer amount of destruction and mayhem that the hero releases on his own city to rid it of bad guys. How can the culture that produces these movies, that idolizes Washington and Lincoln and Truman, that is responsible for Korea and Vietnam and Iraq, how can it not forgive a man for an honest-but-misguided effort to steer humanity away from the slavery it inflicted upon itself ? I'm not saying those 3 people or the 20-or-so he injured are not important and significant moral costs, I'm just amazed by the standards you impose on Ted, standards that you reserve only for Ted. You already accept far far more than what Ted did, you already accept hundreds of methods that put his methods to childish innocent shame, you just accept them in contexts that you are told\brainwashed are worthy. >If you're willing to deliberately, actively, persistently attempt to blow up innocent people The good\bad thing about civilization is that its a distributed system, a massive distributed system based on tyranny, slavery and suffering. You can't disable a distributed system without damaging at least some of the nodes. Your statement applies perfectly to every single war hero americans (and every people on the planet with their own war heros) idol, go ahead, see how many of your heros blew up to shreds innocent people and killed and maimed. Count the bodies honestly and fairly. Humans kill 70 billion animal a year, every day a human spends not killing or blowing up humans is a sin, a day lived by an immoral coward who doesn't deserve to live. That includes me and you. There is no species on earth that kills its own number 7x+ times each year. Every single innocent soul of those animals slaughtered and cannibalized is blood all over your hands, your body, your mind, your conscience. You live in blood, you thrive on it, you build your life and that of your loved ones on suffering that makes Hitler a Saint and Stalin a harmless Grandpa. Ted is the best and most moral of us. May he rest in peace and love.
  - AnimalMuppet 4y ago
    > every day a human spends not killing or blowing up humans is a sin, a day lived by an immoral coward who doesn't deserve to live. First: By your own standard, you don't deserve to live. I'm not telling you to kill yourself; I'm telling you your standard is hopelessly twisted. Second: You condemn Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Truman, because they killed people. And then you come out with the above sentence. You're a bit self-inconsistent here. And even by the above so-called standard, Kaczynski didn't deserve to live, because he didn't kill nearly enough people. > There is no species on earth that kills its own number 7x+ times each year. Eagles. Cats. Whales. Seals. Snakes. They all do this. I think most of the rest of your post is also badly flawed, but I don't have the time or the patience to write a rebuttal to the rest of it.
    - Banana699 4y ago
      >By your own standard, you don't deserve to live. Correct. This is something I say myself in the comment, if you bothered to read carefully. >You condemn Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Truman, because they killed people. And then you come out with the above sentence. You're a bit self-inconsistent here. False. I don't condemn any of those people (not because they killed anyway), I point out your own hypocrisy, and that of most people, when they worship those mass killers, and oppose Ted because he killed 3 people. >Kaczynski didn't deserve to live, because he didn't kill nearly enough people. Because he was stopped short, and because he, like many of us, had delusions of convincing people peacefully. >Eagles. Cats. Whales. Seals. Snakes. They all do this. They kill their own number 7 times per year ? I call bullshit. And if it's true, it doesn't change anything.
      - AnimalMuppet 4y ago
        > I point out your own hypocrisy, and that of most people, when they worship those mass killers You're sure free to tell me what I think. You should stop, because you're not very good at it. > They kill their own number 7 times per year ? I call bullshit. You don't think a cat kills 7 birds and/or rodents a year? They've put cameras on cats' collars. They're far more deadly than just 7 kills a year. You don't think a seal eats 7 fish a year? I don't have research from seal cameras, but I'd be astonished if they ate that little. And most of all, you don't think a whale eats 7 plankton a year? Or do plankton not count? > And if it's true, it doesn't change anything. It destroys your statement that "There is no species on earth that kills its own number 7x+ times each year." And it destroys the logic that depends on it. So, you think killing animals is immoral, and you want to kill all the humans (except perhaps the Jains) because they kill animals. So, what are you going to do? Kill all the eagles because they eat fish and rabbits? Kill all the seals because they eat fish? Kill all the Venus Flytraps because they eat flies? Kill all the whales because they eat plankton? I don't see any possible way for you to have a consistent position here. I'm done with this conversation. I leave you the last word, if you want it.

What's your threshold? How many innocent people does he have to kill and/or maim before you no longer are willing to consider him a hero? And yes, they were innocent. The one I met personally was a tech at the store where I bought my first computer. (And if you consider that enough to make him "not innocent", well, you're using a computer to read and comment here, so...) To me, he is condemned by his methods. If you're willing to deliberately, actively, persistently attempt to blow up innocent people, I can't trust your judgment on how people should interact with each other to make society better.

Banana699 4y ago
As indicated by your comment, you probably live/born in the US. So you probably have as a hero at least one of those 3 people : [George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt\Harry Truman]. Every one of those people killed far more than Ted ever ever dreamed of or imagined. One of them fought personally in wars of colonization and was responsible for the death of countless original inhabitants of the land his country stole, before leading the fighting in a war that, besides killing a hundred thousand person (in an era before humanity hit its first billion, 0.01% of the all humans dead in a single war), set in motion the ignition system for one of the bloodiest and most brutal revolution the world had seen at the time. The second one ignited the first industrial war in history, and brought a wave of destruction and death upon his own country so terrible its effects was felt, is felt, a century later and beyond. The third pair, among their many achievements, had developed a weapon of indescribable power, and unleashed it on a bunch of civilians to own a geopolitical enemy. That weapon remains a permanent guillotine over the head of civilization, patiently waiting for an executioner who will release it. If you hold any one of those people as a heros, no, if you hold any one of those people as anything less than the devil himself personified, then you already understand the fundamentals of what Ted had in mind when he did what he did, you merely disagree with his premises. Ted killed a measly sum of 3 people (according to my rusty memory of the wiki article I'm too lazy to re-read), this is laughable by the standards of a hero. Look at your own superhero movies, look at the sheer amount of destruction and mayhem that the hero releases on his own city to rid it of bad guys. How can the culture that produces these movies, that idolizes Washington and Lincoln and Truman, that is responsible for Korea and Vietnam and Iraq, how can it not forgive a man for an honest-but-misguided effort to steer humanity away from the slavery it inflicted upon itself ? I'm not saying those 3 people or the 20-or-so he injured are not important and significant moral costs, I'm just amazed by the standards you impose on Ted, standards that you reserve only for Ted. You already accept far far more than what Ted did, you already accept hundreds of methods that put his methods to childish innocent shame, you just accept them in contexts that you are told\brainwashed are worthy. >If you're willing to deliberately, actively, persistently attempt to blow up innocent people The good\bad thing about civilization is that its a distributed system, a massive distributed system based on tyranny, slavery and suffering. You can't disable a distributed system without damaging at least some of the nodes. Your statement applies perfectly to every single war hero americans (and every people on the planet with their own war heros) idol, go ahead, see how many of your heros blew up to shreds innocent people and killed and maimed. Count the bodies honestly and fairly. Humans kill 70 billion animal a year, every day a human spends not killing or blowing up humans is a sin, a day lived by an immoral coward who doesn't deserve to live. That includes me and you. There is no species on earth that kills its own number 7x+ times each year. Every single innocent soul of those animals slaughtered and cannibalized is blood all over your hands, your body, your mind, your conscience. You live in blood, you thrive on it, you build your life and that of your loved ones on suffering that makes Hitler a Saint and Stalin a harmless Grandpa. Ted is the best and most moral of us. May he rest in peace and love.
- AnimalMuppet 4y ago
  > every day a human spends not killing or blowing up humans is a sin, a day lived by an immoral coward who doesn't deserve to live. First: By your own standard, you don't deserve to live. I'm not telling you to kill yourself; I'm telling you your standard is hopelessly twisted. Second: You condemn Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Truman, because they killed people. And then you come out with the above sentence. You're a bit self-inconsistent here. And even by the above so-called standard, Kaczynski didn't deserve to live, because he didn't kill nearly enough people. > There is no species on earth that kills its own number 7x+ times each year. Eagles. Cats. Whales. Seals. Snakes. They all do this. I think most of the rest of your post is also badly flawed, but I don't have the time or the patience to write a rebuttal to the rest of it.
  - Banana699 4y ago
    >By your own standard, you don't deserve to live. Correct. This is something I say myself in the comment, if you bothered to read carefully. >You condemn Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Truman, because they killed people. And then you come out with the above sentence. You're a bit self-inconsistent here. False. I don't condemn any of those people (not because they killed anyway), I point out your own hypocrisy, and that of most people, when they worship those mass killers, and oppose Ted because he killed 3 people. >Kaczynski didn't deserve to live, because he didn't kill nearly enough people. Because he was stopped short, and because he, like many of us, had delusions of convincing people peacefully. >Eagles. Cats. Whales. Seals. Snakes. They all do this. They kill their own number 7 times per year ? I call bullshit. And if it's true, it doesn't change anything.
    - AnimalMuppet 4y ago
      > I point out your own hypocrisy, and that of most people, when they worship those mass killers You're sure free to tell me what I think. You should stop, because you're not very good at it. > They kill their own number 7 times per year ? I call bullshit. You don't think a cat kills 7 birds and/or rodents a year? They've put cameras on cats' collars. They're far more deadly than just 7 kills a year. You don't think a seal eats 7 fish a year? I don't have research from seal cameras, but I'd be astonished if they ate that little. And most of all, you don't think a whale eats 7 plankton a year? Or do plankton not count? > And if it's true, it doesn't change anything. It destroys your statement that "There is no species on earth that kills its own number 7x+ times each year." And it destroys the logic that depends on it. So, you think killing animals is immoral, and you want to kill all the humans (except perhaps the Jains) because they kill animals. So, what are you going to do? Kill all the eagles because they eat fish and rabbits? Kill all the seals because they eat fish? Kill all the Venus Flytraps because they eat flies? Kill all the whales because they eat plankton? I don't see any possible way for you to have a consistent position here. I'm done with this conversation. I leave you the last word, if you want it.