[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 32 KB, 274x253, IMG_2182.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10699786 No.10699786 [Reply] [Original]

Have you read his manifesto? Did you form any particular opinion of it? I was astonished by how lucid it was, I expected some completely incoherent ramblings, but what I found was a well structured text and a relatively reasonable tone. His arguments make huge assumptions and he takes a lot of liberties, but he also displays complete awareness of the fact that he's doing so. It's actually interesting.

>> No.10699791

>>10699786
>Have you read his manifesto?
yeah
>I was astonished by how lucid it was, I expected some completely incoherent ramblings, but what I found was a well structured text and a relatively reasonable tone.
yeah he's got a 140 IQ and worked as a math professor

>> No.10699795

>>10699786
>he fell for the psychopaths are insane meme

Well spook'd my man

>> No.10699797

>>10699786
I enjoyed it for the most part. He offers a lot of insights and well reasoned arguments, but his end goals are simply a pipe dream similar to a perfect capitalist or communist state.
Even if people managed to get back to ground zero and live a hunter-gatherer life style with little to no technology, it would be more of a reset of history rather than a suppression of it.

>> No.10699812

>>10699795
>he fell for the all crminals are psychopaths meme

Now who's spooked?

>> No.10699861

>>10699797
Yeah I agree entirely. He was overly idealistic. I suspect he was fully aware of that, though. I don't think he had any delusions about the future. I bet he knew how things would play out but he committed himself to the course anyways, for a sense of purpose.

I also found it ironic how he began the essay lambasting liberals, one of his points being that they try to force their ideals and empathy on "victims" even if they're not actually helping them. But later in the essay is guilty of the same thing, disregarding anyone who is happy with current society, because their goals aren't "real". The way he described how to determine what is a "real" goal and what is a "surrogate" goal was rather vague but he used that distinction many times in the essay to justify doing essentially the same thing he accused liberals of

>> No.10700656

>>10699791
>140
no, he tested almost 170. He was borderline genius. His math dissertation won a prize as best dissertation of the year, and like 10 people on the planet could understand it.

>>10699797
>>10699861
have you guys read 'Anti-tech revolution: why and how'? Intend to read it later on, apparently he touches on this matter you guys brought up

>> No.10700755

>>10699786
It was more or less all manic bullshit except for his observation and twist on that old adage that led to the observation that
>any technology developed outside of war will eventually be used for war
Which is a damn good argument against industrialism

>> No.10700891

>>10700755
>It was more or less all manic bullshit
How?

>> No.10700928

>>10700755
>any war or violence is inherently bad
You're not the target audience, nor you're able to comprehend any of what's written in the manifesto.
>>10700656
I've read all of his writings. ISAIF is the only one I'd recommend, the rest is mostly letters in which he repeats himself a lot, although there are incredible insights scattered all across.

Overall ISAIF blew my mind, after years of absorbing enormous amounts of litterature and philosophy, because of its lucidity and honesty, likewise picked up by OP . Kaczynski is what happens when an intellectual doesn't compromise nor defend his status . It's dangerously intelligent.

>>10699861
This is a rather valid argumentation. The power process and leftism part is definitely weaker than his rock solid analysis of technological progress.

>> No.10701172

Overrated trash that is grating to read. Babby's first critique of leftism.

Read Ellul. yes, I fucking said it again

>> No.10701430

The NEET man's Bookchin

>> No.10701474

>>10701172
Was coming to post this.

>> No.10701499
File: 30 KB, 293x499, technological.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10701499

His technological analysis is taken straight from Ellul, just read him instead.

>By the time he encountered Ellul , Kaczynski recalled, “I had already developed at least 50% of the ideas of that book on my own, and … when I read the book for the first time, I was delighted, because I thought, ‘Here is someone who is saying what I have already been thinking.’”

>> No.10701510

>>10699786
I'm more curious if anybody's asked Kaczynski what he thinks of technology today. AFAIK the dude's still alive and I imagine he's popular to write to.

>> No.10701519

>>10701510
He lives in a concrete vault in the middle of the mountains of Colorado.
Hes hard to reach

>> No.10701525

>>10699795
Ted isn't a psychopath, he was just a very angry person who essentially radicalized himself

>> No.10701618

>>10701172
I'm fucking saying it again too; Power process and leftism is the weakest part of the manifesto. Everyone knows it. Repeating it ad nauseam to gather pseud cred on a neet board is pathetic, get a grip. Encourage people to dive into the topic rather than shitting on Ted, who took it upon itself (his own freedom for fuck sake) to spread the message. Ellul wrote a bunch of books and left it at that, without Ted you can be sure that the amount of people reading ellul would be close to zero.
And yes, Ellul is infinitely more insightful and goes way more in depth than Kaczynski but Ellul is completely utterly unknown. One of the least read important academic in the world. I'm from France, half my friends are in the top litterature and philosophy schools and NONE of them have heard of Ellul, none of them have the slightest idea what technological progress is and its implications. Ellul is absent from academic discourse. Other than your toxic attitude we agree.

>> No.10701816

>>10701618
Hey thanks for the rec man

>> No.10701831

>>10701618
Sad to hear Ellul isn't known in France, I've read a few of his other books and they're all very good

>> No.10701841

>>10701519
No, he responds to fan letters fairly often

>> No.10701853

>>10701618
We have daily Ted threads and they never go anywhere. They're pretty much reddit-tier at this point.

> without Ted you can be sure that the amount of people reading ellul would be close to zero.

I read Ellul before ever hearing about Ted. It's part of why it was so difficult to finish his Manifesto.

> Ellul is infinitely more insightful and goes way more in depth than Kaczynski

k thanks

>> No.10701857

>>10701841
He's a dick with delusion of grandeur though. He'll reply to your letter with "I'm so busy and smarter than you. Fuck off."

>> No.10701935

>>10699786
I deeply admire Kaczynski. I've read his manifesto and various other published writings, interviews with people who knew him, and a couple biographies. He's a fascinating and intelligent person who escaped our post-industrial technocracy on his own terms and lived to tell the tale. His thoughts on society, while not completely original, are insightful, entertaining, and mostly accurate. In some ways I have modeled or am modeling my own aspirations after him.

But while I agree with many if not most of his conclusions, his arguments are colored by petulant resentment, arrogance, and unrealistic expectations of other human beings. His bombings were random and hateful, and ultimately not much different from the behavior of an adolescent school shooter. There are times when it seems that his entire body of thought was created only to justify his misanthropy. He was in tremendous pain and uncapable to cope with society, and so he turned to weakness and inflicted pain on others for fun and personal relief.

He had serious mental problems. His fanboys will tell you how smart and driven he was, but they won't tell you that he once considered changing his sex or failed undergraduate physics.

>> No.10702172

>>10701935
I think most people go into him expecting mental problems, so fanboys don't feel they need to express it.

>> No.10702230

>>10701618
idk man, I think the idea of the power process is important. That's the entire crux of the techno skeptic movement to me, the fact that the more convenient our lives get the more dehumanized we get.

>> No.10702292

>>10699786

He had a few interesting things to say, but it was ultimately fantasy. Did he say anything about how his social engineering would turn the US into China/Russia's slave in a few years?

>> No.10702390

>>10701935
I think his pain is very apparent in his writing. And I think it's also one of the main reasons it makes the manifesto so interesting.
He was an absolute robot, no doubt about it, but he sublimated his suffering with society to a genuine and honest analysis of the society we live. And he did it not for himself, as he knew he'd get caught, but in a very altruistic feeling.
I think one of the main reasons he sounds so artificial at times is the fact that he lived under a system in which he saw society as a whole insisting in bringing itself down. I can only imagine his absolute horror and despair. The world walking to its doom and you seeming to be the only one who realizes it? Anyone would fall to insane behaviours.
I feel, however, that his attacks make a lot of sense when readimg ISAIF. He attacked middle-level people in the process. People who were important enough that would trigger a response from the system, but not one that would be overwhelming and keep him from getting his ideas spread.
Personally, I'm not a very politically optimistic person, so I see his attempts to "awaken" society and actually bring out lasting change in a martirical way as very naive and ideological, but it's moving nonetheless. To me, he's almost a literary character.

All in all, he's a very interesting one. Someone who wishes for a better future to everyone because of his own suffering, but simply can't find a way to escape the limitations of real life. Very tragic.

>> No.10702399

>>10701618
We've had this thread for innumerable of times. It always goes the same way.
>muh 170 iq
>like a mathematical proof
There is no improvement, just an endless circlejerk over the manifesto, with no desire to improve or even read something else. It is not a mystery why people who suggest other stuff to read are getting toxic.

>without Ted you can be sure that the amount of people reading ellul would be close to zero.

This is a misconception on an absurd level. There has been discourse on Ellul's ideas for a half a century now. If you read any philosophical texts on technology he is bound to show up. I encountered him through studying propaganda. Most people I've discussed Ellul with don't even know about Kaczynski.

Ellul's only problem was that he was a Christian anarchist who didn't fit the role of the philosophical star in the French academia, nor did he try to start a revolutionary movement, (well except fighting in the Resistance)

>> No.10702474

>>10701857
Source on this?

>> No.10702544

>>10702399
I started reading Ellul's wiki and he seems like a very interesting character. However, I'm absolutely clueless in regards to most philosophy and sociology. Could I jump right into his writins or should I deepen my philosophy more?
I'm basically just superficially familiar with the Greeks.

>> No.10702629

>>10700656

> 170
> "borderline" genius

I have read his manifesto. I do agree with it a lot of what he's saying and admittedly it's the first time I've read anything that's represented how I've felt politically- certain facets of it at least.

I don't think that you can coherently describe what Kaczynski wanted to describe. There are terms that he uses to denote specific types of people, like when he describes liberals, that haven't been done before. The links between perosnalities, motivations, psychology etc. all exist but it's so difficult to describe because you can't prove it. I think his writing is incredibly lucid but the thought process and the point he's trying to get across is too fragmented for most to understand it. I remember in parts he spoke about how to describe one certain aspect of a liberal correctly and coherently it would need a ten volume series written on it. It must have been so hard for him to write with his message to still be somewhat comprehensible

>> No.10702824

>>10699786
Almost everyday I think about this idea of his: In primitive society EVERYTHING that kids want to do is the right thing. Climb, fight, run around, build stuff, catch animals, have sex (older kids you pervs), swim, etc. I mean you can't even think of better activities since all of those build skills needed for later in life. Natural desires and society structure were in harmony. Now nothing makes sense...

>> No.10702863

So where do I start with this Ellul cat?

>> No.10703168

bomp

>> No.10703173
File: 62 KB, 565x488, grugton.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10703173

>>10702544
>>10702863
You really don't need much knowledge before jumping in. The only thing people seem to get caught on is the term technique, for which https://ellul.org/themes/ellul-and-technique/ is pretty helpful.

You should begin with The Technological Society or Propaganda. The latter works well independently but you get more out of it if you read TTS before it.

>> No.10703423

>>10701618
>rather than shitting on Ted, who took it upon itself (his own freedom for fuck sake) to spread the message.
Wow, he blew up innocent people, got caught, and got sent to prison for it. What a fucking martyr.

>> No.10703593

>>10701172
Ted pointed this out in his Postscripts to the Manifesto. He said it himself that he just took what Ellul wrote, and dumbed it down for brainlets who wouldn't understand The Technological Society, much less read it. He also acknowledges he's not being original, and that it's a moot point.

>> No.10703660

>>10703173
What are the differences between Ellul's Propaganda, and Bernays' Propaganda?

>> No.10704705

Ellul was a jew tool being part of the frog resistance during WWII.

>> No.10705594

>>10703660
Bernay barely scratches the surface. Ellul looks at propaganda not just from a psychological perspective but also from a sociological and a cultural one.

>> No.10705601

>>10700656
170 isn’t borderline genius

>> No.10705878

>>10702474
There is none, Kaczynski was well-mannered when he replied to me.

>> No.10705885

>>10705878
You've actually written to him? Any more details? I kinda worry that that kind of thing would put you on some kind of government watch list.

>> No.10705904

>>10705885
It will.

>> No.10706083

>>10701172
>Babby's first critique of leftism.
kaczynski did critique both left and right.

>> No.10706098

>>10705885
>kaczynski thread on a malasian bomb manufacturing image board
you already are, son

>> No.10706197

>>10701499

Other authors in the same?

>> No.10706218

>>10703423
from my perspective the innocent people are evil

>> No.10706233

>>10706197
*vein.

>> No.10706236

>>10706218
From everyone's perspective you're an idealistic moron

>> No.10706309

>>10702474
Read anything written by luddites who talk about him. He's a giant asshole who is sure he's smarter than everyone. He basically told his editor that he was stupid and didn't like the way he edited his book but he'll grudgingly accept it because no one else gives a shit about publishing his terrible manifesto.

>> No.10706792

>>10706197
Illich, Mumford and Linkola.

>> No.10706820

>>10703660
There is a pretty thorough wiki article on the book.

>> No.10708269

>>10706309
Sauce for this? I can't google
>anything written by luddites who talk about him

>> No.10708463

>>10699786
Fun fact: he got fucked up as a kid by a psychology experiment gone wrong.

>> No.10709503

>>10708463
you can hardly call MKULTRA a psychology experiment gone wrong