Was he right?

Was he right?

washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/unabomber/manifesto.text.htm

Other urls found in this thread:

track6.mixtape.moe/hpesiq.pdf
psychologytoday.com/blog/impromptu-man/201205/harvards-experiment-the-unabomber-class-62
archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/104495239/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

why is this nut bag being shilled so hard here ?

because he was right.

This. Kaczynski was one of the greatest thinkers of the 20th century

Absolutely right, but Ted drew the wrong conclusions from it. The future of the species is spacefaring machines. AI and supergenes will make all of us niggers and round up your children for extermination. And that's a good thing. Nobody needs stinking naked apes. Ted is extremely smart and definitely on to something, but ultimately misguided.

He was right on most of it, some of the manifesto and his other writings are a little out there but his position on liberals was dead on
He was definitely bonkers, but a genius no doubt

Great at pointing out a real problem.

Dumbass at solutions. Hurr durr let's make bombs out of matches and send them in the mail. That'll help..

Technological society will crumble without being able to send mail anonymously.

Don’t you think it’s kind of amazing that WaPo and NYT published his full manifesto? That would never happen today.

Shit was wild before internet, or even modern police investigation

>Sup Forums
>Agrees with a crazy man who lived in a cabin with no running water and no electricity
>Says this shit while posting on the internet

You faggots on here are hypocritical about everything.

Hey user, thats super fuckin' rude!

delete it.

He wrote a book on how to do a revolution, maybe we should take heed.

track6.mixtape.moe/hpesiq.pdf

Because he understands you better than you understand yourself.

>you have to agree with everything somebody says and does in order to appreciate his ideas
Leftist detected.

Fucked up...

psychologytoday.com/blog/impromptu-man/201205/harvards-experiment-the-unabomber-class-62

right, wrong, schitzo or reincarnation of jesus hes still a nut bag and i see this thread everytime i get on here. go shill this shit on kikebook or something

>hes still a nut bag

It's much easier to call someone crazy than to think about what they say.

Your fear of introspection blinds you.

that page is unavailable to me

Hating modern technology was like 99% of his beliefs.

You guys are posting on the internet. You don't see the hypocrisy?

Fuck Kaczynski.

ive read his shit. theres always another way. bombing people is bs

In case tl:dr
He was part of a three year torture/humiliation experiment... performed by a head doctor with ties to the CIA...

No. He was a nutcase that couldn't reason past the level of a petulant 2-year-old. He had a "Whaaa! People won't let me do whatever I want so I'm going to blame this tinker-toy and go hit others." kind of thinking.

>bombing people is bs

Well yeah, his solutions were retarded as fuck.

But he saw the problems more clearly than anyone else before, or since.

>couldn't reason past the level of a petulant 2 year old
>contained the most concise sociological examination of the left that has ever been released

Haven't read his manifesto in a while, but from what I recall he was largely driven by some gay kind of angry neo-luddism, which is nothing any reasonable person should adhere to.

yes, modernity is a decorated cage, anyone who says otherwise has stockholm syndrome

He was right except for the Anprim faggottry.

You must not come to Sup Forums often if THIS is the type of thread you complain about.

How is it hypocritical for someone to appreciate his ideas but not adhere to them? He had good points, it doesn't mean I'm going to fucking copy what he did.

How would you differentiate between a state of things that's a "decorated cage" whose only defendants have Stockholm syndrome and a state of things that's the opposite?

an absence of organisation-dependent technology i.e. those that require vast, interdependent webs of dutiful technocucks in order to purvey, such as the state, or nuclear power

i complain plenty. i was just asking why this guy is being shilled

Love how the highest of intellect breeds what to us seems like insanity. And somehow they are correct in so many ways you could not believe it to what length they would go to be heard and still we disregard them.

That's not really an answer to my question. You're just telling me what you think a non-"decorated cage" would be, which is fine, but what I wanted to know was how/by which method you'd differentiate State X and State Y (regardless of what they actually entail) in terms of their "decorated cageness", when you also declare all defendants of said state to simply suffer from Stockholm syndrome.

Making I'm taking you too literally or something, but to me this sounds like the whole "manufactured consent" issue, where one makes the claim that a person's consent to something isn't actually true consent but rather manufactured, thus creating a dilemma that makes it impossible to ever identify *anything* as "true consent". It just seems like you could never possibly tell whether any given *current* state of things is a "decorated cage" or not, because the only non-pathological answer is, by your definition, "Yes, it is a decorated cage".

>Making I'm taking you too literally or something
*Maybe, not Making

somalia on steroids

Modern society and technology is making people sick.

People are going to become more miserable as time goes on and they won't be able to explain why but they'll keep supporting it because it's all they know.

Technology will ultimately remove every shred of freedom, privacy and liberty from individuals

...

I dropped him when I found out he used to kill his neighbours' dogs, sending bombs in the mail is one thing but the doggos are going too far.

Good archived thread about Ted:

archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/104495239/