• Norin@lemmy.world
    140·
    2 months ago

    It’s probably better to read the philosophers Uncle Ted was pulling from (and ultimately failed to understand).

    Ellul especially.

    • dgdft@lemmy.worldEnglish
      36·
      2 months ago

      Might be a matter of taste, but ISAIF is worth a read on the basis of its wild mix of sociological brilliance and unhingedness IMO. That’s not to say I endorse blowing people up in the slightest, but the work stands taller than the sum of its influences.

      E.g. I think he synthesized and added to quite a few different authors in presenting his concept of oversocialization. (Please do correct me if I’m off-base — I love philosophy but it’s not my main wheelhouse).

          • three@lemmy.zip
            7·
            2 months ago

            You enjoy doing extra work? Why not explain the gibberish acronym in the first comment?

            Oh! I’m soooo sorry! I thought everyone wrote their dissertation on Ted “My First Love” Kaczynski?

            Listen to yourself, you sound ridiculous.

            • dgdft@lemmy.worldEnglish
              36·
              2 months ago

              It’s just off-the-cuff writing without copyediting. Tad sloppy, but weird hate, homie.

              E: To squarely address my view of Teddy K, he’s in the same bucket as Karl Marx, Otto Von Bismarck, Rasputin, etc. Not someone whose core values I share, or think is a good person — but a historically interesting character who has cultural symbolic importance for the role they played in their respective time and place.

              • three@lemmy.zip
                1·
                2 months ago

                Very true, knowing random trivia is a sign of intelligence and definitely not a side product of you being terminally online.

      • Norin@lemmy.world
        24·
        2 months ago

        Ted misses a lot in Jacques Ellul’s The Technological Society, which is where I’d start off f your looking for philosophers critical of modern technology.

        If you’re curious on that particular subject, I’d also recommend Lewis Mumford’s Myth of the Machine or The City in History.

        Or, for something that’s less of a tome (both Ellul and Mumford can be overly wordy), Ivan Illich’s Tools for Conviviality is incredibly critical of the modern world, but also offers hope that isn’t based on mailing bombs to universities.

        • ggtdbz@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          4·
          2 months ago

          Huh. I picked that up from a used book stand on a whim just based on the tile and skimming it, like ten years ago. I should probably read it.

        • zloubida@sh.itjust.works
          3·
          2 months ago

          Ellul is a wonderful author, very inspiring. As someone inspired both by Christianity and anarchism, he’s one of the authors in my personal pantheon.

          Just don’t read his texts about Israel.

  • Comrade_Spood@quokk.auEnglish
    129·
    2 months ago

    To all the people in the comments being like “Ted had some good points.” Judi Bari, Peter Kropotkin, and Murray Bookchin are all people who have written about environmentalism and the problems of technology, industrialization, and such and better than the reactionary psychopath did. Fascists love the unabomber and use him to normalize eco-fascism. Stop fucking saying he had good points cause there are better authors who have made those same points without all the fucking reactionary and eco-fascism tied to it.

    • CultLeader4Hire@lemmy.world
      49·
      2 months ago

      Uhhhhh

      Stop fucking saying he had good points cause there are better authors who have made those same points

      Doesn’t this inherently imply he does in fact have good points if they’re making the same points… you also make a good point that there’s better sources that don’t come with a ton of ideology baggage but what your saying here is yes he does have good points but read someone else saying his points instead

      • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
        12·
        2 months ago

        For real. It waters down the meaning of the word “fascist,” and now when I talk about actual fascism (with a well-informed take because I only use that word when I’m applying it correctly), people don’t take me seriously because they think I’m just “labeling everyone you disagree with as a fascist.”

        I’m not. I disagree with everyone I label as a fascist, yes. Because I disagree with fascism and I only label fascists fascists. But I’m perfectly capable of disagreeing with someone without labeling them a fascist, if they’re not a fascist. I do it all the time!

      • Comrade_Spood@quokk.auEnglish
        6·
        2 months ago

        Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, its a duck. I don’t really care if the duck says its not a duck and that it is against ducks, its still a duck. When you go about blaming the lefties (of which he labelled fascists as leftists) and the gays, and envisioning a society that would functionally genocide a bunch of people I am gonna call you a fascist. Cause if we just got rid of technology and returned to primitive living, a lot of people would die. Namely disabled people and people with chronic illnesses. It is indirect eugenics. Its exactly why most anarchists nowadays do not associate with anarcho-primitivists, and call them eco-fascists as well.

        The reason why people like Bookchin and Bari are better is because they critique industrialization while putting forward solutions that don’t kill a bunch of people.

        And lets not pretend like fascism is this coherent or cohesive ideology. Its an ideology of opportunism. Mussolini and Hitler were vastly different, and even just comparing Mussolini’s writing to his actions there’s a lot of differences. For example Mussolini’s writings were anti-monarchist, yet the monarchy remained in fascist Italy because it gave him an opportunity.

        Ted might not have been a fascist directly, but his ideology is not incompatible with fascism. And the consequences of his ideology is still genocide, even if indirectly.

        • Pricklesthemagicfish@reddthat.com
          4·
          2 months ago

          You sound like a fascist to me and the electronic equipment you used to post this comment makes you a willing coconspirator to human slavery and unnecessary suffering. Especially my suffering to have read it and lost brain cells.

    • MerryJaneDoe@lemmy.world
      23·
      2 months ago

      there are better authors who have made those same points without all the fucking reactionary and eco-fascism tied to it.

      Seems like a great reason to discuss Ted’s viewpoints. We should definitely discuss the ineffectual extremists. Compare and contrast. Weigh and measure. That’s what truth-seekers do. Telling people not to read a particular author borders on censorship.

      But asking people to expand their reading list and providing actual recommendations - that is wonderful and commendable. Thank you for that!

      • Comrade_Spood@quokk.auEnglish
        11·
        2 months ago

        I never said don’t read it, but comparing and contrasting is not what is happening. Its like when Osama Bin Laden’s manifesto or whatever was making the rounds and everyone was like “ya know he makes some good points.” Everyone just keeps parroting the points of far-right extremists cause they pointed out a pretty universal issue like imperialism, consumerism, environmental destruction, etc. If the only perspective that gets spread is that of a far-right nutjob, then it normalizes the problematic parts of their perspective. Its always just begins and ends with “the unabomber made some good points.” Not “the unabomber made some good points, but Bookchin is more practical and not a eco-fascist.”

        • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
          7·
          2 months ago

          Was the unabomber far-right? He seemed to hate industry with a passion. That doesn’t sound very far-right…

          I’m not saying he’s a role model that we should emulate, and I disagree with his methods. But that doesn’t mean we should reject his ideas. Stalin was a terrible statesman and a brutal dictator, but philosophically he had some points worth discussing.

          Lumping people into this category of being “untouchable” is not only an ad-hominem, but it’s also damaging, because it prevents people from engaging with the material critically and in environments where there’s a diversity of perspectives. Now the only people who read Stalin are the radical edgelords who are disillusioned with western society and so take everything he says uncritically at face value. It wouldn’t have the same allure if we didn’t make it something in the “restricted section.”

          It’s perfectly valid to say “Ted’s actions were wrong, but some of his ideas are worth considering.”

  • 58008@lemmy.worldEnglish
    110·
    2 months ago

    Has good points… decides the best way to bring those points to the world is planting bombs.

    Adam Lanza had some good points about autism (remember when he called into that radio show?). His subsequent expression of his feelings about the world was less than optimal. There’s no need to give the cunt kudos for his insights.

    This is some “say what you like about Hitler, but at least he made the trains run on time!” level of vacuous.

    • FudgyMcTubbs@lemmy.world
      19·
      2 months ago

      I mean, you’re not entirely wrong, but TK killed 3 and injured less than 30. Harry Truman killed vastly more people than TK and he’s essentially lauded, as most ex presidents are.

        • AngryDeuce@lemmy.world
          6·
          2 months ago

          Only positive thing he ever contributed to the world.

          Its a shame more of the people today that emulate him don’t commit fully and do the same thing, and just spare us all the bullshit suffering, before it inevitably finds itself there anyway, which it will…it always does eventually. Their way is not sustainable.

          They’re like the randoms I get playing chess online that refuse to lay down their fucking King when a mate is inevitable. They’ll even say as much in the game chat. Like for fucks sake, can we not?

    • rumba@lemmy.zipEnglish
      18·
      2 months ago

      I’m not saying that bombs were a good or acceptable idea, but I am saying that if it weren’t for the bombs, none of us would have read that manifesto to consider this post.

      • BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.ukEnglish
        10·
        2 months ago

        As time goes on I realise that terrorists do in fact win a lot of the time and sustained campaigns of violence do in fact achieve their goals in a lot of cases. Which is fucking depressing.

    • Saledovil@sh.itjust.works
      2·
      2 months ago

      Thing is, Hitler didn’t make the trains run on time. The Autovahn was already being build when the Nazis took power, which they then took credit for. Germany’s economy was basically a shell game of debt.

  • AutistoMephisto@lemmy.world
    28·
    2 months ago

    Did you know that Northrup Grumman developed the standard USPS mail truck? They also developed the B2 stealth bomber. Northrup never intended for their truck to also be a stealth bomber, but Ted said “I’m about to do what’s called a ‘pro gamer’ move.”

  • sidebro@lemmy.zipEnglish
    20·
    2 months ago

    Ted had some good ideas, it’s just how we went about doing what he did I take issue with.

    • bitteroldcoot@piefed.socialEnglish
      17·
      2 months ago

      but if he was just a peaceful crank on the street corner holding a sign people would have ignored him. Nobody listened till the bombs went off. And when he was caught all they did was make fun of his cabin. Personally I thought it was a nice cabin in a nice location.

        • bitteroldcoot@piefed.socialEnglish
          2·
          2 months ago

          That is exactly the picture I flashed on when I wrote the comment. I’ve always wondered why they took the cabin prisoner. Probably because they didn’t want it to become an object of hero worship.

          Or it Is an scp, and anyone who lives there becomes the Unabomber. Secure, Contain and protect.

  • toad@sh.itjust.worksBanned
    7·
    2 months ago

    My neurological disease happened after we moved near the highway. I hate vroomers more than anything. Just walk instead of poisonning the air, fatzo

      • MerryJaneDoe@lemmy.world
        8·
        2 months ago

        I know a lot of people who hate fascists and communists. It’s kind of a thing, in democratic countries, to be wary of extremists.

        I’m not saying this fully describes Ted, obviously he had mental issues. But pushing away extreme lefties with one hand and extreme righties with the other doesn’t make Ted any different than your average American.

          • MerryJaneDoe@lemmy.world
            2·
            2 months ago

            Any thoughts you’d like to share? Knowledge you’d like to drop?

            I don’t mean this in a hostile way. I can clearly infer that, in your opinion, communism does not represent an extreme viewpoint. I hope that you can likewise infer that my comments were a shorthand representation of American politics and not meant to offend anyone.

            • 0x0@lemmy.zip
              1·
              2 months ago

              you can likewise infer that my comments were a shorthand representation of American politics and not meant to offend anyone.

              No, i couldn’t, but by that lens you’re absolutely spot on.

              Neither was i offender nor does this comment contain sarcasm.