Another day, another Ted Kaczynski General! Ask questions, answer questions.
>Reading List:
Industrial Society and Its Future (ISAIF):
editions-hache.com
Anti-Tech Revolution (ATRev):
we.riseup.net
>What do?
Here is our 5 step plan:
Step 1: Read and understand ISAIF (and ATRev)
Step 2: Raise your powerlevel
Step 3: /prep/
Step 4: Spread the word
Step 5: Revolution
Details: pastebin.com
>Who is Theodore John Kaczynski?
Neo-Luddite
Confirmed 167 IQ
INTJ
Man of Action
PhD in Mathematics
/ourguy/
>Last Threads:
#1 (300+ replies)
#2 (100+ replies)
#3 (150+ replies)
#4 (250+ replies)
.....aaaaaand, we're back! Wonder what happened to germanon....
Have sex.
Loved ISAIF, started reading the letters from Technological slavery. Blessed thread
I hope that fbi autist life is ruined because of his obsession. I know he probably living off the grid after reading his manifesto a thousand times.
No clue. So we try to get some more questions for the FAQ, and maybe organize the FAQ once we feel like we got all bases covered?
Have had and will have. Howboutyou?
Entry level Ted talk: When is Technology bad for you?
youtube.com
Stop fucking dogs
Yeah imo Technological Slavery is even better than ISAIF. Definitely worth a read.
Who?
Love Luke, hope he would do more videos on the topic, less linux things
Same, I'm hoping one of the upcoming Not Related! episodes will be on the topic. He wanted to do one on Myth of the 20th Century but thinks they'll shut him down for it. Fucking kikes.
Absolutely. Lemme start organizing the questions that came up from the previous thread. Another germanon had put together a list, will use that to build upon.
Hi
I started a thread today at 2pm, unfortunately some of you didn't notice / didn't make the time.
If you guys want, we can change the time according to the majority's needs. I am very flexible due to corona
So we discovered our problem was being bogged down by the same questions over and over again. To elevate the discourse to a higher level, we seek to create a pastebin with copy+paste answers for all the common repetitive questions.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) so far:
>Got caught instantly
>Zero impact on society
>LSD, MKUltra, insane, tranny (Ad Hominems)
>Society can not truly collapse! Everything will be back to modernity soon
>Our problem is jews and only jews
>You only have to separate good technology from bad technology
>"just go live innawoods"
>use bitcoin ->The common person could protect themselves from tech companies micromanaging their lives
>Dude I'm so fucking past the whole save the world shit.
>You only have to separate good technology from bad technology
>Technology serves humanity, makes humans freer, helps us vanquish suffering, pain and violence
>Collapse of tech-civ cannot be brought about, because for it to be successful, it must be simultaneous (btw, must admit this is a realy tough one, honestly have never been able to counter it....), AKA: ''the Chinese are going to take over and kill us if our industrial system collapses''
>If you don't like technology, fine, you don't have to use it
>Why would almost all humans almost unanimously accept and even be very happy with many many aspects of tech-civ if it were ultimately destructive to humanity? [ i don't know what that means tbqh]
>right, but am a hedonistic individualist! Plus, human beans recycle!!!! Don't you recycle to save the planet you ingrate???
>in some sense we are ''more free'' with technology. In some sense, less.
>murderer question : he was a murderer, the public would never approve a movement following his ideas
OH FUCK
i thought EST = european standard time
i fucked up, sorry
Did he really do it or was he an MK Ultra patsy?
2pm EST (Eastern Time)? That was 20 minutes ago according to my reality.
this was my thread:
my bad
Haha, classic mistake. Timezones are sometimes confusing. So what time do we stick to? What is the best time for both Euros and Americans? I guess it's something like 2pm EST, since you get both people then?
MKUltra had minuscule to zero impact on Ted's psyche. Read the ''interview'' transcripts yourself: you'll find it's at worst a mildly uncomfortable interview, but not something that would cause psychological damage to anyone.
let's stick with 2pm EST for now
A knightly Burger compiled and posted the MKultra in the last thread.
Do any of you actually believe that an anti tech revolution could happen?
>"Notwithstanding the folly or Ray Kurzweil’s fantasies of a future technological utopia, he is absolutely right about some thing. He quite correctly points out that in thinking about the future most people make two errors: (i) They "consider the transformations that will result from a single trend [or from several specified trends that are already evident] in today’s world as if nothing else will change." And (ii) they "intuitively assume that the current rate of progress will continue for future periods," neglecting the unending acceleration of technological development." (Technological Slavery, p 63)
>"We have to conclude that humans will become obsolete... ...It’s important to understand that in order to make people superfluous, machines will not have to surpass them in general intelligence but only in certain specialized kinds of intelligence." (Technological Slavery, p 71) - Greta Thunaboomer
How can one child be so fucking BASED?
pic related
fuck yeah
I'll add your post to the FAQ, good question that will be answered properly with time.
This is one topic TKG seems to genuinely disagree on. What we all agree upon, is that the Techno-Industrial system is anti-human and anti-nature. It is destroying both our environment and also going to displace humans. We have no future but one outside of the system. The system might collapse itself or as a conscious effort gets collapsed (some suspect that Dr. Kaczynski masterminded COVID-19!) but either way, it has to be agreed upon that we only have a future outside the technological system.
Still working on the FAQ, it is slow-going, but wil. get it done. basically just compiling the questions and the answers that came up in the past thread.
Genuinely fucking love Technological Slavery bros (the book, not the reality). Almost every page is a quote-mine.
Bioengineering
>´´The only code of ethics that would truly protect freedom would be one that prohibited ANY genetic engineering of human beings, and you can be sure that no such code will ever be applied in a technological society. No code that reduced genetic engineering to a minor role could stand up for long, because the temptation presented by the immense power of biotechnology would be irresistible, especially since to the majority of people many of its applications will seem obviously and unequivocally good (eliminating physical and mental disease, giving people the abilities they need to get along in today’s world). Inevitably, genetic engineering will be used extensively, but only in ways consistent with the needs of the industrial-technological system.`` - Technological Slavery (page 75)
same, i'll post a few
>Didn't he get caught instantly?
Fact: Kaczynski was the subject of the longest and most expensive investigation in the history of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
>Zero impact on society
Then: During that time his writings were widely debated.
Today: Ted Kaczynski and his ideas have never been more relevant than in Coronavirus-ridden world of 2020. Technology keeps going forward and now we have things like Clearview AI. We are approaching Panopticon. Unlike most thinkers, Ted has the magic of only increasing his relevancy with time.
>After a collapse everything will be back to modernity soon
Many anons -including Ted with his superb discernment and intelligence- believe there won't be enough 'steam left in the engine' to jumpstart tech-civ ever again.
There is an intuitive truth in this: fossil fuel consumption and utilization requires MUCH technical knowledge and reverence for efficiency, logistics and high-organization which will be very hard indeed to find if tech-civ does in fact collapse. Machines will rust and decay; whomever is leftover after collapse will be too busy eating grubs and getting tetanus while trying to get muh garden going to even worry about lighting, heating, etc., much less bringing the decaying dams, electric plants and other generators of energy up and running again.
Now here is the rub: even if all these psychological/sociological/anthropological difficulties were to be ovecome, Ted --and others-- posit that there will literally not be enough raw material (oil) left to bring another Industrial Revolution about.
Great!
>´´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.`` - Technological Slavery (page 94)
It is important to realize: (You) do not have a place in the techno-industrial future! If you don't have a STEM mind, take it as a word of faith: any activity you do, can and will be done better and cheaper by a machine. Doesn't matter how smart you are. It's only a race against time.
>A Revolution is just not going to happen.
Ted:"The big problem is that people don't believe a revolution is possible, and it is not possible precisely because they do not belive it is."
>Our problem is jews and only jews (or blacks, muslims, ..)
I agree that Multiculturalism is a burden on western society. But let's suppose we had a perfect white ethnostate, we would still be at mercy of the technological system. There is no reason to believe, the strive for technological growth would stop, and with it the negative consequences.
This quote was not aimed at you but
my collected FAQ:
pastebin.com
You don't have my questions about
>50% infant mortality
>muh constitution
>gold standard
They don't want STEM minds. They can't be controlled. That's why all the doctors are poos now.
Fantastic answer on the ''After a collapse everything will be back to modernity soon''.
People really need to VISUALIZE post-collapse world: a world where you don't get food and clothes from a supermarket. Everyone would spend the the remainder of their lives just learning the essential traditional skills of survival. It would take many, many generations to achieve the complexity of even Ancient Romans. Complex trade routes, complex established institutions, complex societies... modernity is a steady built on thousands of years of small linear progress.
Do Euroanons have land which doesn't have zoning restrictions or building codes, or is that a North America thing?
I copied the list from the previous thread, those are good questions and totally will be added to the FAQ in my opinion.
It's no coincidence that it is often those who understand technology that dread technology the most. The logical conclusions and the path we are on is clear. I'm no fan of Elon Musk, but he's 100% spot on understanding Artificial Intelligence and the disaster it's for the human race.
>After a collapse everything will be back to modernity soon
After modern agriculture collapses and fossil fuel deliveries are cut off 90% of the population will starve or freeze to death. Major cities harbour exotic infectious diseases due to constant international travel and without modern sanitation medieval outbreaks of disease will rip through cities
I'm pretty sure you're not allowed to build whatever you want outside of zoning areas in Finland. Also not legal to build low tech houses: they gotta be energy efficient (modern) and other crap. So people who want to get innawoods need to buy old property.
You mean there are places in Canada that have ZERO regulations?
bump
>You mean there are places in Canada that have ZERO regulations?
I think that is pretty much true but the catch is they're faaaaaar out. Nowhere any jobs, industry, population centres, etc. It would be 2hr drive to walmart. 4l of milk would be $10 or more. Canada is not a bad place to try a planned TJK community because they give you $500 leaf bucks per kid and there is commie health care. It would be a very rough life though, especially at the start. Very cold long winters, short growing seasons
Oh and shipping is prohibitively expensive, alot of online businesses would not be profitable.
Interesting yet that such is possible. Canada definitely doesn't seem bad. Is homeschooling legal in Canada? Are you legally allowed to be a resident in a deep woods country?
I'll imagine my own future as slighly more urban, i.e a rural village. There really isn't any other option if one wants to live somewhere that is not the Arctic and actually grow stuff. At least in Europe.
Bumperino
If an ant colony was given the option to sacrifice itself to create humans, shouldn't they do it?
If an humans were given the option to sacrifice themself to create a super AI, shouldn't they do it?
>(the book, not the reality)
kek'd.
>´´The only code of ethics that would truly protect freedom would be one that prohibited ANY genetic engineering of human beings, and you can be sure that no such code will ever be applied in a technological society. No code that reduced genetic engineering to a minor role could stand up for long, because the temptation presented by the immense power of biotechnology would be irresistible, especially since to the majority of people many of its applications will seem obviously and unequivocally good (eliminating physical and mental disease, giving people the abilities they need to get along in today’s world). Inevitably, genetic engineering will be used extensively, but only in ways consistent with the needs of the industrial-technological system.`` - Technological Slavery (page 75)
This is also the second half of paragraph 124 of ISAIF.
------------
Almost done with the FAQ. Patience, tedfrens.
Homeschooling is legal in Canada. Ontario happens to have pretty much no regulation on homeschooling.
>Are you legally allowed to be a resident in a deep woods country?
There are some places were you're not allowed to "camp" on your own land, but as far as I understand unorganized townships have almost no restrictions. Every place has a different term for no zoning.
>I'll imagine my own future as slighly more urban, i.e a rural village.
I spoke with a man who bought a property in extremely rural Alaska. I had to tell him he's never gonna attract families to that land because it would be hours drive away from a hospital. I guess that makes me somewhat of a hypocrite, but in my defence we still have to worry about the state taking away your kids
I have read that Amish allow weak babies to die. I guess you have a different mentality if you're planning on 6-12 pregnancies
Someone who subscribes to this thinking, seems to favour increasing complexity over the experience of human life. It's very hard to argue against someone who has a death drive to destroy himself and who do not want to LIVE. They are not worth our time. We must focus on people we can persuade: those who like to be human, those who want to live, those who like nature.
>Almost done with the FAQ. Patience, tedfrens.
Yeah just remember to bump the thread occasionally, can't do it myself. Made the mistake of creating thread on desktop.
What would happen to neo-luddites in a post collapse world?Most normies would miss their comfy lives and resent you for taking it away from them.
Reply to that question from previous thread:
Many different vectors condensed ito your argument. Let's see.....
Self-sacrifice is an eminently christ-cucky notion. A notion that helped to enslave humanity, -look no further than what it has done to Europe- in fact, you can even clearly see traces of this christcuckery in even extreme-lefty lgbtq-iptrifgltltsetcetc:
>muh immigrants, muh faggots, muh minorities
As a side note, absolutely convinced that without Christianity, all this (((degeneracy))) would have perished under the fucking sword.
In fact, many times have half-jokingly referred to the LGBT-lefty-anarcho-commie neu-institution as the new-Christians, or post-Christians.
Counter-argument:
NO ONE should self-sacrifice, might as well commit suicide and call it better-living. In other words, Self-sacrifice taken to its absolute logical extreme means the death of the self-itself that sacrifices for other selves that must sacrifice for other selves that must sacrifice for other selves, ad infinitum, all for some retarded notion of 'compassion'.
Here goes the FAQ anons. Did it on Notepad, not tech-savvy at all, so let's see how it copy-pastes over to here....
FAQ (work in progress):
In no particular order, at least for now
1. Got caught instantly - he did it for attention - after all, he did eventually get his manifesto published in the New York Times
and Washington Post
Fact: Kaczynski was the subject of the longest and most expensive investigation in the history of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
2. Zero impact on society
Then: During that time his writings were widely debated.
Today: Ted Kaczynski and his ideas have never been more relevant than in Coronavirus-ridden world of 2020. Technology keeps going
forward and now we have things like Clearview AI. We are approaching Panopticon. Unlike most thinkers, Ted has the magic of only
increasing his relevance with time.
3. LSD, MKUltra, insane, tranny
4. Society can not truly collapse! Everything will be back to modernity soon
5. Our problem is Jews and only the Jews
Nobody is denying that things like ''Jews'', ''Blacks'', diversity and Muliculturalism are a net negative for our societies. However, these
grave problems are dwarfed when compared to industrial society and its consequences. Even if we got the Aryan White ethnostate, then what...?
The mechanisms and problems of industrial society wouldn't disappear. We can't just get ''good guys'' in charge. ''Good technology''
cannot be separated from ''bad technology''. There is no reason to believe the strive for technological growth would stop, and with it the many
negative consequences.(This answer should also include UK Tedposter's take on the Jews as a self-propagating subsystem;
this has the additional advantage that it brings into the FAQ the very important concept of 'self-propagating systems', a colorful term which
in itself will no doubt pique the curiosity of many anons new to Ted's ideas.)
6. You only have to separate 'good' technology from 'bad' technology
7. "just go live innawoods"
8. use bitcoin ->The common person could protect themselves from tech companies micromanaging their lives
I've thought about the ''community'' aspect; current opinion that it's simply too hard to find level-headed and like-minded people who want to share the lifestyle in the same region. Let's be frank, many people who want the innawoods lifestyle are fucking nuts and highly unpleasant! Gotta really know others before you consciously want them as neighbours.
Anyways, it's already hard enough finding one girl to do it with.
9. Dude I'm so fucking past the whole save the world shit.
10. You only have to separate good technology from bad technology
11. Technology serves humanity, makes humans freer, helps us vanquish suffering, pain and violence
12. Collapse of tech-civ cannot be brought about, because for it to be successful, it must be simultaneous (btw, must admit
this is a realy tough one, honestly have never been able to counter it....), AKA: ''the Chinese are going to take over and kill
us if our industrial system collapses''
This has happened on occasion, it's not like the Roman techonology vanished into thin air when that civilization slowly eroded away.
Parts of it permutated and still live on to this day, a lot of it vanished as the tribal elders of some 100 people really didn't
have the need, the know-how or the resources to maintain a aqueduct capable of running water for 100.000 people. When a civilization
collapses, some of the tech is scavenged and repurposed, some is just left hanging in the air,
still usable but with no-one to use it, and some gets lost to the times. You catch my drift? I think some Roman sewer
systems serve to this day in the Middle East, as irrigation water canals.
13. If you don't like technology, fine, you don't have to use it
14. Why would almost all humans almost unanimously accept and even be very happy with many many aspects of tech-civ
if it were ultimately destructive to humanity? [ i don't know what that means tbqh]
15. right, but am a hedonistic individualist! Plus, human beans recycle!!!! Don't you recycle to save the planet you ingrate???
16. in some sense we are ''more free'' with technology. In some sense, less.
What would happen to the average Irishman if Ireland were suddenly cut off from the mainland? What % of your food is imported? What % is urban? What happens when your toilet doesn't flush?
>Most normies
99% of normalfags will die from disease and starvation. Simple as. What are they going to do? They won't learn to hunt, grow veggies and fish if they don't have a strong drive to LIVE. It'll be a bottleneck effect. Nobody who doesn't want to live, will make it to the post-collapse world.
Does everyone have the equivalent of a social security number and does that count as technology?
17. murderer question : he was a murderer, he killed three people and maimed over twenty.
Yes, he did. No, he should not have. However, one thing is the writer, another is the text.
One thing is the actor, another is the film.
One thing is the artist, another is his canvas.
(circumstantial) Proofs:
-when a writer dies, his work does not. Shakespeare for example. Long long dead, his works have been published, translated
and reinterpreted countless times
-Anonymous writers exist: there are many examples of excellent anonymously-generated texts. By definition, we know nothing about
their authors, yet their texts are known to us
-Furthermore, we NEVER know EVERYTHING there is to know about non-anonymous writers; thus leaving room for enjoyment and
appreciation of their works when perhaps our ignorance-impaired morality would otherwise not allow us to do so.
For example:
Hemingway: it came out roughly 15 years ago that during WWII he took the 'liberty' of executing over twenty German POW's.
During all those decades in between, millions enjoyed his works, without ever knowing he was a cold-blooded opportunist thrill-killer
Klaus Kinski: about ten years ago it came out that he literally repeatedly raped one of his own daughters. This however does not
invalidate the excellent movies he protagonized, like 'Fitzcarraldo' and 'Aguirre, the Wrath of God'; and even if your own personal
sensibilities do invalidate his work for being such a fucking degenerate, not a single pixel on those films has been changed by you
knowing what horrific deeds he committed in secret.
In both the Hemingway and Kinski examples, your knowledge -or ignorance- of these dark facts about the artists that only
come out years later and even posthumously DO NOT CHANGE THE WORKS THEMSELVES. After all, these facts about Hemingway and Kinski
could very well have never come out, and people would have still enjoyed their Art, never knowing they were closeted monsters.
Bumpski
(Murderer question continued)
.....never knowing they were closeted monsters.
-----
What casualties Ted inflicted were minuscule in comparison to the real existential threat that the industrial society causes upon
all life on Earth (humans, non-human Fauna, Flora, etc.). [This last point here has the potential of being the Achilles' heel of the FAQ...:
Possible normie-tier counter-argument: who are you -or Ted- to decide who lives and who dies...? Next 'logical' step in this reasoning: Who are
you to decide tech-civ is ultimately bad??? It's hard to answer this. It's a philosophical rabbit hole with no exit....///IF life on Earth is
Good, its existence ought to be protected. These are my morals, these are what guide me. I don't believe in absolute morals so anyone is really
free to disagree here. Another point to be made is the fact that never in the history of our species have humans been subjugated to so much risk
-and occasional catastrophe- as in industrial civilization. Ted makes a good point about nuclear plants in this vain in ISAIF, about how for
example people in Prypiat had no choice as to whether they wanted to raise their kids under the threat of Chernobyl.]
18. hurr durr, why you even using a computer, bro?
19. What about 50% infant mortality [this needs to be fact-checked, seriously doubt it ws exactly 50%]in pre-industrial society?
How is this 50% infant mortality rate you describe anyh different from infant mortality rate in other mammals in their respective environments?
Why would you expect it to be any different from -or for- other mammals? Does this current-year fortuitous and temporary decline in infant
mortality justify all future -and current- suffering of ALL creatures under tech-civ...?
Can you send a link to a PDF of Technological Slavery? Can't find it anywhere
get fucked
20.After a collapse everything will be back to modernity soon
Many anons -including Ted with his superb discernment and intelligence- believe there won't be enough 'steam left in the engine' to jumpstart
tech-civ ever again. There is an intuitive truth in this: fossil fuel consumption and utilization requires MUCH technical knowledge and reverence
for efficiency, logistics and high-organization which will be very hard indeed to find if tech-civ does in fact collapse. Machines will rust and
decay; whomever is leftover after collapse will be too busy eating grubs and getting tetanus while trying to get muh garden going to even worry
about lighting, heating, etc., much less bringing the decaying dams, electric plants and other generators of energy up and running again.
Now here is the rub: even if all these psychological/sociological/anthropological difficulties were to be ovecome, Ted --and others-- posit
that there will literally not be enough raw material (fossil fuel) left to bring another Industrial Revolution about.
--------
This is all so far, maybe anons should scour older threads for more pre-packaged answers. Most answers in this FAQ come from this thread: 249939527 . Think it's been picked clean already...
Great work Argie!
>UK Tedposter's take on the Jews as a self-propagating subsystem;
I'll retrieve this from archive. We can take the creative liberty and edit these texts to better fit the context, as they were originally replies to certain posts and not meant as general answers to a general question.
UK Tedposter:
>Actually he addresses that problem indirectly. Certain forms of international Judaism, as powerful and influential as they might be, are merely just another self-propagating system competing for power amongst all other self-propagating systems and their subsystems. As the competition and cooperation between all of these systems is beyond rational human control in the long term, it's obvious that the Jews, as human beings, are subject to these same forces that drive civilization, even if you allow that they have more control over it than the rest of us do.
>I don't deny the existence of powerful and quite often insidious forms of international Judaism, but to say that they are the sole cause of all of our problems and that they control everything is a laughable oversimplification that completely ignores all the other observable processes.
>There has been historical evidence of Jewish meddling and schemery in many countries throughout the ages, but they are just one type of self-propagating system and merely a subsystem of the host nations that (certain forms, not all forms) of Judaism become active in. They pursue their own interests in the short term with little to no regard for the long term consequences just as all the other self-propagating systems do, and it's clear that a sizeable percentage of those self-prop systems have little to do with the Jewish and have not been interfered with much by them. You are grossly oversimplifying a fascinatingly complex amalgamation of hundreds of thousands (if not many more) of different causal factors and attributing them all to a single cause.
>How is this 50% infant mortality rate you describe anyh different from infant mortality rate in other mammals in their respective environments?
>Why would you expect it to be any different from -or for- other mammals? Does this current-year fortuitous and temporary decline in infant
>mortality justify all future -and current- suffering of ALL creatures under tech-civ...?
A normie, particularly a christcuck, would say that humans are special and more deserving than animals. I see christcucks unironically whining that people care more about endangered gorillas than niggers who are chopping each other's hands off in civil wars
My retort to infant mortality
1) High infant mortality is necessary for eugenic reasons. Not allowing the weak to die is doing severe genetic damage to the human race
2) Low infant mortality is the main driving force behind overpopulation, the "cure" that is worse than the "disease" of high infant mortality
3) Low infant mortality psychologically conditions humans to be weak. Why would you care some Syrian kid was drowned to death by his idiot handout seeking parents if you've lost a premature baby and another to meningitis?