What is your opinion about this human being?
Tbh, for me, he is a prophet. And yes indeed, he killed people but, imagine the situation that you know that the society will be a fucking disaster in the future, and the only way you consider to try to solve the issue is, to KILL the people promoting this situation. This is the kind of thought that he had
Other urls found in this thread:
He makes a good case but should've just started a blog
>opinion?
Wrote a good PhD but ultimately ruined his career as a mathematician.
There are a few /sci/ jokes about him, so not a completely irrelevant fellow.
good manifesto
He might have had a point about the whole technology thing but in the end ruined it with his killing people thing.
Indeed
I agree. He could've tried to invest more time in people and not with bombs. But, sometimes people aren't a thing. I mean, with some people it's not possible to change his point of view, so, it might better to spread knowledge with fear then with love. Radical answers to hard questions.
He's a dumb boomer
Read that Dan Brown book 'Origin', technology will save us.
He was right, but he was just one man. That's the problem with anarcho-primitivists, they go out on their own and never organize.
He makes an interesting argument but his plan is extremely moronic. Any person with some ability to think would look at history and notice how technologically advanced nations either conquered primitive nations or aided their development towards modern standards. You cannot stop humanity from developing technology, it's like trying to convince an elk not to use its antlers.
I miss Mena
Did nothing wrong. I haven't read all of ISAIF but I get the gist. I need to finish it, and read Linkola. What are some other similar writers?
I'm pretty sure he wasn't targeting people to solve the tech issue directly, but to force the media to publish his manifesto to put the tech issue into the public consciousness.
KILL BAD. NO KILL PEOPLE.
A few years ago I might have said the same thing but I've since lost all faith in the institutions, public discourse and people.
Also if he hadn't blown shit up, noone in this thread would know about his manifesto.
I'm starting to think the only solution is targeted acts of sabotage against society-bearing technology and institutions. Water reservoirs, powerplants, telecommunication bottlenecks etc followed by rightwing Pol Potism to purge some of this entrenched corruption. Discussion, rational debate, information campaigns, voting, even lobbying all appear pointless to me. Everyone knows that everything is all fucked up but everyone's also too comfortable to change shit.
Life and death struggle is needed to jaunt this anti-human system out of its deathmarch, de-domesticate western man, reduce population etc. We'd also need to hit Asia and Africa with designer plagues for environmental reasons.
This is why I can't be a back-to-the-woods primitivist. You can't stop tech development, it's an eternal armsrace. I also want humanity to survive and colonize space, otherwise we'll die to the next asteroid impact. Primitivists and reactionaries have the right criticisms of modernity but you kinda have to reconcile the immutable aspects of human nature with technological progress or mankind is just a dead end. There's another author I haven't read named Guillame Faye who I believe argued for a tiered society of agricultural peasants ruled by a high-tech elite or something.
Right now just about anything seems preferable to his gay satanic hellscape of total inversion.
Yeah, the same way Europeans "saved" the natives during colonization. Except much more drastic. Unimaginably so.
Man will no longer be man. We will be something else, dependent on technology to even survive.
Nice trips but I'm sure there will be safeguards.
His ideas were definitely worth considering but his solutions were absolutely retarded.
Surely for the entire remainder of mankind's existence, perhaps hundreds of millions of years, all nations (or MegaCorps as the case may be) will multilaterally agree to an arbitrary moral code of "this much tampering with humanity is fine but no more" and never be tempted or forced to one-up the next guy in the genetic/cybernetic armsrace.
Spoiler: the chinks are already genetically engineering babies while we give our sons HRT and smile politely as our daughters breed with certain human subspecies with hyperviolent tendencies and a one standard deviation lower IQ.
We're fucked. It's all fucked.
he was right but I'm too fucked already to drop out of civilization, I need my SSRI and bing bing wahoo
>mankind is just a dead end
Indeed, like several other species before us. We've just been more destructive on our way out compared to our extinct brethren.
>rightwing Pol Potism
>de-domesticate western man
>designer plagues
>I also want humanity to survive and colonize space
>a tiered society of agricultural peasants ruled by a high-tech elite
Too bad you are functionally retarded, you could have gone places.
Just a crazy boomer that contributed nothing of value, edgy kids like to believe his ramblings have some deeper meaning when it's just nonsense.
From what I understood, his critique is something like this:
> Technological development takes away our freedom. You become dependent on the structure around you, and the industrial society turns you into just an automaton that does your function and gets some rewards in return. Literally like a trained animal.
> The reason for this is that, by definition, the industrial society requires individuals to act as machines, otherwise it doesn't function.
> Here's a bunch of evidence for my claim: People are depressed, leftists (and the modern men in general) are wimps, conservatives are clueless, and here's how it's all related to technology.
I think he's absolutely right in his critique. Technology DOES make the individual weaker and he does a great job at explaining this phenomenon. However, he missed the fact that technology literally gives the collective enough power to do literally anything. Technology has made us into Gods.
Another thing I have to say is that, with the internet, technology has made it so it's easier for individuals to do great things. We see individual creators (pewdiepie, undertale guy, even moot i guess) constantly winning against whole companies.
But Ted does sort of address this when he says "Ultimately, technology might result in something good, but it'll be at the cost of great suffering."
this guy should do an AMA on reddit
Poor man's Pynchon
Teddy manifesto confirmed word of god by numerals
Rightwing polpotism was obviously tongue in cheek.
We absolutely need to de-domesticate to some extent.
How would you solve this massively dysgenic overpopulation if not with sterilization or extermination? Free condoms, feminism for turdworlders or some other dumb, ineffectual Davos-type bullshit?
I never said I believe in Faye's "archeofuturism".
maybe in the future instead of surrogate activities we can have people fighting for survival in small 10 people autonomous cells on mars. if you fuck up and run out of oxygen, food, or water, you're on your own and die
>Spoiler: the chinks are already genetically engineering babies while we give our sons HRT and smile politely as our daughters breed with certain human subspecies with hyperviolent tendencies and a one standard deviation lower IQ.
that puts things into perspective yet it's not wrong
that said they're beginning from a disadvantaged position so the west is still ahead
>I need my SSRI
that's because you have nothing better to do other than shitpost and wageslave. if you actually had your life in your own hand you wouldn't have time to think about muh feelingz
correct
I thought you stopped posting about this retard when your juvenile arguments kept getting blown the fuck out
Only if it's got a dank retrofuturistic aesthetic.
If you're a brainlet, then yes.
>How would you solve this massively dysgenic overpopulation if not with sterilization or extermination?
You're right, we just need to exterminate all the populations that overconsume resources. So North America, Europe, and East Asia are the first to go, and you're first in line, friend. After that, ecological destruction would be on the way down for a century.
This would have been easy if MAD actually happened, but the USSR just had to go and implode before pressing the button and Yeltsin was too much of a bitch in 1995.
this thread is dumber than an actual Jow Forums thread
Of course the thread derailed into racism and transphobia. Jow Forums can't do anything right.
yeah why can't we have an intelligent discussion about the manifesto of a terrorist
What's your counter argument to the manifesto?
I'd prefer to keep the populations that give some thought to the environment and have the wherewithal to act on it and potentially colonize space but ok.
Anti-racism and trannyism are psyops thought up by late 20th century subversives. Literally nobody gave a fuck about that prior to the cultural revolution in the west i.e the 1960's. Imagine being such a pussywhipped clown that you give a shit about the feelings of men in drag or other races who hate you.
YOU CAN'T STOP PROGRESS
>populations that give some thought to the environment
>populations that are actively destroying the environment at a record pace
No need to hide it, just admit you want to ride Musks micro cock to Mars. No need to colonize space when you want the biggest leaches to survive your extermination fantasy.
Ted was right, you idiots want to become supermen so badly you'd become slaves to your own tools.
Imagine being such a mentally deranged edgelord that you worship this guy
Cause literally 90% of the world population, especially in Europe was in servitude before industrial revolution.
We are as free as nobody ever before.
100% of the population was free before the first Agricultural Revolution. No masters, no slaves. Just you, your group, and the rest of nature.
Free to spend your entire day in pursuit of food, yeah
Free to be slaves to our desires. Embrace your (((overlords)))
They spent a few hours a day gathering food, gave it out to the group evenly, then were free to do as they pleased.
Free people need little because they want little. You are a slave to the infinite wants drilled into you since birth, so your masters will feed you till they don't need you anymore.
>They spent a few hours a day gathering food, gave it out to the group evenly, then were free to do as they pleased.
They live their entire lives in pursuit of food. They're constantly on the move between hunting grounds following the movement patterns of their prey and can never settle down in one place because of it. They also die young for nutrition-related deficiencies
Had his hand forced by the CIA
>da gubmint is doing crazy shit and its absolutely nuts
>da gubmint must be evil and just not doing something that must be necessary
>ima go bomb some folks cause thats the obvious answer
Dude, what a dumbass.
Ted almost had it all, he really did, even mentally he was almost there at grasping and understanding the full scope of the picture and why the Feds were pushing forward with their top secret tech research.He just never made it and never expanded his mind beyond itself to see the full picture and more importantly understand where he fit in and where the Feds fit in and why they were interested in pursuing the avenues that they were.
Despite his numerous semi accurate futuristic predictions (all analytical) his personal reaction and his continued pursuance of the same type of reactions which involved mailing out dangerous, possibly life terminating bombs via the USPS was extremely juvenile and showed the mindset of a not quiet there yet teenager who was throwing fits because he realized that his personal freedom space was not absolutely his or personal.
Very stupid and in the end he ended up fucking himself over by acting like a complete teenager retard.
Dude, yea I get it the Feds are doing crazy conspiracy shit that transgresses on your freedums and stuff. Take your head out of your asshole and try not sperging out right away and think about it some more.
Nope, he just decided to spreg out completely like a tard and ended up going on a mailbomb mailing spree.
>They live their entire lives in pursuit of food.
All life does.
>They're constantly on the move between hunting grounds following the movement patterns of their prey and can never settle down in one place because of it
And? We are equipped to move, not sit on our asses like sea sponges.
>They also die young for nutrition-related deficiencies
When humans first became sedentary, it led to an even worse nutritional deficiencies and mortality rates that took thousands of years to reverse. On the other end of that curve we got slave societies. Freedom died with the hunter-gatherer.
If he never killed people you wouldn't know his name.
>They spent a few hours a day gathering food, gave it out to the group evenly, then were free to do as they pleased.
you are incompetent and illiterate and rational discussion with you is a waste of time, educate yourself and try again
>All life does.
no, modern people don't, food is easy to get
>And?
and hunter gatherers aren't "free", you are only free to spend your life hunting, you have more freedom as a wageslave than you do as a caveman, you may have to work 40 hours a week but in your time off you can do so much more than any caveman ever could
funny how little anti-technology people actually know about life before technology
>comparing human colonizers to inanimate tools
Nobody takes him seriously apart from the one edgelord who keeps making threads about him. Far more compelling, intelligent, helpful and benign criticisms have been made of technological society by people who have never killed anyone
>Nobody takes him seriously
Nobody would have heard about him at all if not for his bombs.
And you underestimate the size of his fanclub. Ecofascism is on the rise.
>Ecofascism is on the rise
>t. Earth Liberation Front
WHy does nobody ever talk about his time with MK Ultra? Does no one find the government responsible for this?
After his contact with the CIA, he became worried about the advancement of technology, and how it could eventually do damage to our society. MKUltra must have done him good.
Just because you don't know facts doesn't mean you can project it onto others.
Hunter-gatherers worked on average less hours than their sedentary descendents. That's what current research shows. Take it up with anthropologists if you think otherwise.
>food is easy to get
For you fat ass it is. Half the planet has to claw their way to finding one decent meal a day.
>you have more freedom as a wageslave than you do as a caveman
Hunter-gatherers worked less hours to get their daily needs than humans today. Hunter-gatherers weren't slaves to a system that kept them in debt to masters for their entire lives. Once they finished their work, they did what they pleased. You think you have more freedom because you can distract yourself with more stuff while you actually have little actual control over your life.
>funny how little anti-technology people actually know about life before technology
Ironic coming from you, you drone. Don't get your information from movies and outdated primary school textbooks.
You would be a lot more effective with selective annihilation instead. Target specific persons for assassination which creates a political void. You then fill that void with your person of choice. As your war advances victory draws closer.
>Hunter-gatherers worked less hours
You don't understand how it works. You can't measure the amount a person works merely in hours. Hunter-gatherers were slaves to the migration patterns of animals. Even if you weren't actively on the hunt you needed to be moving to the next hunting ground or getting ready to move to the next hunting ground. Nomadic hunter-gatherer tribes could not "do as they please". Anyone living in primitive conditions spends most of their time doing all the chores required to maintain their own existence regardless of if they farm or not. You may enjoy living like that, but it's not exactly freedom and definitely not freer than living with technology
For some reason I read this in Jordan Peterson's voice.
Ted is the real deal, unlike that de-radicalization shill Peterson.
>Anyone living in primitive conditions spends most of their time doing all the chores required to maintain their own existence regardless of if they farm or not.
Even accounting for other daily chores, they had more leisure time than the average person today. Take it up with palaeoanthropologists if you disagree.
anyone have wojak version with a hoodie?
>we need to destroy technology to achieve freedom
>no one should be free to think in new ways or invent anything because that would be technology
Doesn't sound very free
The work/leisure divide is in itself a product on modern society. Primitive societies aren't structured around 'work hours' - you have fun while you work. You talk to your friends while you're weaving baskets, you do alot of low frequency work that is difficult to quantify as a work hour. Is walking to the next campsite work? It's not lesiure, but you have to do it to survive. It's not like they were busting their ass like a factory worker but to call that freedom is disingenuous. They were very restricted in what they could do, they had no few posessions, only temporary housing and they died young because of poor health
I think technology is like food. Fundamentally it's good, but there's a ton of crap out their that's bad for you. The problem isn't technology itself, but identifying the good and the bad technology.
So it's basically Pol Pot's bullshit, but without red, because "fuck commies".
READ LINKOLA
what would have been then the more appropriate response?
He was half-correct. His solution was unnecessary and extreme, and things are far worse now than when he wrote his manifesto.
>Ecofascism is on the rise.
Ecofascism is on the decline, it was in its peak decades ago and it had nothing to do with Ted
>primitivism is ableist
My fucking sides
>Man will no longer be man.
I fail to see the problem. Being humans is rather inconvenient but even the word "man" has always been open to redefinition.
> dependent on technology to even survive.
Like we have been since the stone age?
What happens when, like food, you are often only given choices between different flavors of garbage tech because those that supply it decided that's all you needed?
>They were very restricted in what they could do
Restrictions due to the natural world will always be there, and are still with us today. Right now we are just delaying the worsening disaster ahead of us that would put the remaining life in a worse situation than it has been in millions of years. What they could do they did with pride and happiness, unlike today where your nearly limitless choices leave you depressed and numb since they aren't free choices but distractions.
>they had no few posessions
Need little, want little. What they needed they could always reuse, repair and make again if necessary. No need to lug around a bunch of useless garbage.
>they died young because of poor health
It was even worse after settlements and agriculture started and took a long time to get back to previous levels. And it wasn't until modern hygiene was introduced 250 years ago that any real change happened on child mortality.
t. someone who didn’t even read it
That's bs, they still had time to do other things like art. Just as an example oldest discovered figurative painting is 40000 years old, way older than agriculture. They probably had rich oral culture, poetry, music etc,
>transphobia
not a thing
this is so sad
Alexa, can we cull humanity?
anyone who unironically uses the word ableist should do the rest of society a favor and commit suicide
b-but muh equality!
>Protean Magazine
They have a whole magazine of pseudo-intellectual assholes trying to out- thesaurus one another.
delusional retard
>His ideas were definitely worth considering but his solutions were absolutely retarded.
sort of like marx then
He made a good points
Ted correctly described many issues in contemporary society in his manifesto, but was ultimately wrong in identifying their cause.
He makes the distinction between small-scale and large-scale technology, but the example he uses, Roman aqueducts, is an example of how even large scale technology can be used well, while avoiding almost every issue he mentioned in the manifesto.
What many people here don't seem to realize is that reliance on the "system" in order to get something as basic as food has existed since ancient times. It's nothing new. It just seems that it wasn't the case, in comparison, since nowadays we have much better technology.
Trading part of your "freedom" to get something in return has always been the implicit contract of society. That's just how things have always been, and how they will always be, no matter the level of technological development.
No living being has truly been "free", not even in prehistoric times. You can't just choose not to hunt anymore, or you will die. You must still obey your biology.
There is something that he does mention, but most people overlook: leftism. Nearly everyone seems to completely overlook that entire section when discussing the manifesto. And of you look at the way many """tech""" companies behave, it's perfectly accurate.
That's the real problem. Even large-scale technology is a tool after all. A laege, complex tool that needs sustained maintainence by many people in society, but a tool nonetheless.
What a certain society does with technology is ultimately a reflection of its main values and beliefs. The west in particular have pretty much completely lost the notion of the sacred, leading to people finding shelter in vague ideals such as "progress" to replace the gods.
That way, technological progress becomes the goal, and not simply the means to express the values of a healthy society. That's why other countries, despite being technologically advanced as well are still quite different.