>>14846692
>people who do not know how to make good arguments against what they are opposed really jeopardize the whole movement against it.
Plain speak arguments aren’t “nuanced” enough for him? And you think a more college educated approach is the only thing that can save the movement?
This was about Kaczynski insistence on technology being the boogeyman, and this anons inability to address the argument. He’s against capitalism is he? But he’ll defend it and put forward no counter of Kaczynski’s. I’m swinging at air here. It’s not my turn to go again, but I’ll address these bad faith “arguments”
>>14846343
Technology is a tool, I don’t care what the word origin is, but I will concede that it is a special kind of tool. It’s one of those things that escaped out of Pandora’s box, the fruit of knowledge, etc. it cannot be unlearned. What the hell does Ted say about this? Keep everyone as dumb as possible? The solution has never been the reactionary Luddite one.
Do you actually need to know the background for the system we inherited from ages past? You need an essay on this twitter feed, or can I just cite the historical facts of the matter? When some humans established agricultural communities and had to defend their new sedimentary lifestyle from predators and the still nomadic tribes, the hunters became warriors and the warriors became soldiers and the chiefs became kings and enslaved people with the points of the swords. The soft metals became more decorative, jewelry, and event money. The social necessities of these ages drove the development of these technologies one after another. Primitive state and primitive capital. Both held together with law, or the word made solid.
I don’t care what you call which, but it’s bleedingly obvious which is the system that can be changed and which is something that can only be ignored by a contented society.
How about this way. Technology is driven by curiosity, human desire to know. Capitalism isn’t.
Capitalism is driven by an obsessive compulsive disorder. Greed.
> Do you mean to imply that wealthy elites are the inventors of technology
Oh and where do I say this? They take all by force
>Can you pinpoint an example
The World of Odysseus, by Finley
>Then you without capitalism...
Anarchist theory and practice. Lots of reading can you find Wikipedia?
> the rest of your post, you’re implying a causal relationship where I don’t think you can claim there is one.
What, the mental state of the owner class? Do you not believe in psychology?