/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15816805]

Was he right?

[Anonymous No.15816818]

>>15816805
Was matters not. Is does.

[Anonymous No.15816838]

>>15816818
True enough. If he was right before, he is still right now.

[Anonymous No.15816849]

Reminder that Ted is ultimately a brainlet and everything he tried to say in his manifesto was said better and more eloquently by other, smarter thinkers.

[Anonymous No.15816864]

>>15816849
Name them.

[Anonymous No.15816937]

>>15816805
Yes, about everything.

>>15816849
and? lol

[Anonymous No.15816980]

>>15816805

He was right on leftism, but we should find other ways to fix that problem than destroying technology

[Anonymous No.15817038]

reminder that ted is handsome and smart

[Anonymous No.15817150]

Linkola is better

[Anonymous No.15817164]

>>15817150
is linkola eco fascist? im anprim but i don't mind eco fascist. we have the same goal but they want to work from the top.

[Anonymous No.15817167]

>>15817150
hahahahaha, sure

[Anonymous No.15817208]

>>15817164
>we have the same goal
read Kaczynski. Good god, how old are you guys?

Linkola is better? Hahahahahaha. Yes, let's make use of a government (a self-replicating system, a technological apparatus) to get rid of technology!

[Anonymous No.15817209]

>>15817164
He was an anti-anthropocentric ecologist, knowing full well the consequences of the industrial revolution from the perspective of an environmentalist. Kaczynski is alright, but he's mostly a libertarian. If one sees Capital as the destructive process it is, strict authority and centralized power is needed to ensure sustainability. Anarchism is weak.

[Anonymous No.15817221]

>>15817208
just like auth communist have the same goal of ancoms. it leads to the same goal which is communism.

[Anonymous No.15817227]

>>15817208
You haven't read Linkola, faggot. Read Can Life Prevail.

[Anonymous No.15817241]

>>15816805
I remember seeing some passage where he was whining about the left and how aggressive they were and that maybe they would get what they want if they asked nicely. Guy is a moron.

[Anonymous No.15817242]

>>15817208
>>15817227
Also, since anarchism would never work, the alternative if one denies human governance, is Post-Humanist Accelerationism.

[Anonymous No.15817270]

There is a reason why Linkola was a fisherman who enjoyed bird-watching, and TK a literal math genius who ran the only instance of successful terrorism in history (fuck off marc-édouard)

reminder that TK pressured the media into publishing a manifesto he hadn't written by the time they agreed to publish it. he proceeded to write it in three days. this is beyond our plebiean comprehension, nothing gets more based than that. imagine if al-qaeda managed to score an interview with george bush, but instead came unprepared and started scribbling their demands at the last minute.

[Anonymous No.15817305]

>>15817242
either work from the top and heavily regulate market and put severe punishments or work from the bottom with anarchy and rebellion. accelerationism for the sake of it won't work, attack with the purpose of ecology and let it be known.

[Anonymous No.15817333]

>>15817270
And it's still an influential piece of literature to this day. Uncle Ted is exceedingly based.

[Anonymous No.15817349]

>>15817270
Linkola admitted that if he had the stomach to commit acts of terrorism, he would have most certainly done so. My preference for Linkola is strictly ideological. Libertarianism, or ideologies striving for weak power, will always be inferior to authority centered ones. Restricting the population, prohibiting certain technologies birthed within the last 10 years, and more are necessary to be acted upon by an authority.
>>15817305
Personally I think we're past the point of human action. Either global disaster strikes, ending capital and culling the population, or Capital resumes its entropic accelerative tendencies towards techno-capital singularity.

[Anonymous No.15817350]

>>15817270
holy shit i didn't know about that.

[Anonymous No.15817437]

>>15817349
>Personally I think we're past the point of human action.
spreading the word and waiting is something to do. in some places like mexico they are organizing some insurrection groups but they are nihilistic and just attack for the sake of acceleration.

[Anonymous No.15817508]

>>15816849
>Reminder that Ted is ultimately a brainlet
the anime poster says about the 160+ iq math prodigy that is respected in his respective academic circles.
>and everything he tried to say in his manifesto was said better and more eloquently by other, smarter thinkers.
doesn't matter, his works garnered attention because he took action rather than contemplated.

[Anonymous No.15817554]

>>15816849
>everything he tried to say in his manifesto was said better and more eloquently by other, smarter thinkers.
Is it a fucking competition? Would those "smarter thinkers" somehow think Ted was wrong?

[Anonymous No.15817577]

>>15817508
>doesn't matter, his works garnered attention because he took action rather than contemplated.
>took action

He mailed some bombs and blew some people up, how is that any kind of meaningful, concrete action against industrial society? When last I checked, all it did was get him sent to prison and our hellish industrial capitalist society is still around.

You people just like him because you're chimps and you're easily impressed by big explosions and loud noises.

[Anonymous No.15817588]

>>15817577
>blew some people up, how is that any kind of meaningful
not him. it brought attention and seriousness for the issue.

[Anonymous No.15817590]

>>15816805
He was right about everything except his solution.

[Anonymous No.15817591]

>>15817577
Well, you have neither a point to make nor actions to show for it. Ted had both, regardless of how little you value the latter

[Anonymous No.15817601]

>>15817577
>He mailed some bombs and blew some people up, how is that any kind of meaningful, concrete action against industrial society? When last I checked, all it did was get him sent to prison and our hellish industrial capitalist society is still around.
>what is memetics

[Anonymous No.15817611]

>>15817577
>and our hellish industrial capitalist society is still around.
only action will change that. how did russia turned from monarchist to communist? with action and violence.

[Anonymous No.15817623]

anarcho cowboyism?

[Anonymous No.15817643]

>>15817623
cowboys are degenerate and weren't the least bit "anti-technology" or "anti-civilization"

[Anonymous No.15817672]

>>15817643
anarcho nativism?

[Anonymous No.15818480]

read this. i will read anti tech after it. should i read the essay collection first? "technological slavery"

[Anonymous No.15818841]

[Anonymous No.15818873]

>>15816864
Elull, Marx, Lukacs and the Frankfurt School

[Anonymous No.15818911]

Uncle Ted is incredibly based.
However, there are two important things that get me that I felt he didn't fully address:
>Define technology
>How can a society that shuns technology defend itself from one that doesnt

[Anonymous No.15818939]

>>15818911
Fully addressed in anti tech rev.

[Anonymous No.15818959]

I don't know about you guys, but if I didn't have access to technology I would have km

[Anonymous No.15819011]

Why did Ted have to kill those people?

[Anonymous No.15819026]

>>15818939
really? i read that and missed it. guess i'll have to go back.

[Anonymous No.15819045]

>>15818873
>Marx
>smart
zuzzle

[Anonymous No.15819047]

>>15819011
gotta break some eggs to make an omelette
>hon hon

[Anonymous No.15819056]

>>15817150
I disagree

He's right on some stuff, and kind of overlaps with Ted in some ways, but he lacks foresight (thought that Japan and the US would be the major sources of population boom), but ultimately behind his lifeboat ethics he just seems kind of autistic. His essays right after 9/11 justifying it are pretty crass, but not that different from what people were writing at the time tbf. You never really hear people arguing that the US brought it on themselves anymore

His overall point is right though, that if it's the difference between everyone dying and intentionally letting some die so some can live, the latter is the moral choice for those who want to protect life

[Anonymous No.15819067]

>>15817164
Eco-fascism is an internet larp with no real definition. What Linkola advocated for was massive population reduction and reduction of harmful technology by essentially any means necessary, nothing to do with nationalism or anything like that

[Anonymous No.15819154]

>>15819067
bullshit he explicitely mentioned strict authoritarian rule for the sake of ecological preservation. Actually read his book.

[Anonymous No.15819181]

>>15816805
Yes. Consider reading David Skrbina’s Metaphysics of Technology
Not too hard of a read but gives some much welcome structure and refinement to Ted’s thinking

[Anonymous No.15819183]

>>15816849
>better and more eloquently
you mean windingly? philosophy isn't a prose contest you mong

[Anonymous No.15819192]

>>15819011
>people
Technocrats are merely embodied progress. Nothing human about them beyond their appearance

[Anonymous No.15819751]

>>15819154
I have actually read it

Strict authoritarian rule does not mean fascism, it just means the state enforcing environmental laws more harshly than they're currently doing

[Anonymous No.15819798]

>>15819751
eco-fascism was mentioned somewhere near the introduction of the book

[Anonymous No.15819878]

>>15819798
It's also mentioned on Wikipedia, that doesn't mean he's advocating for le based green skullmask in his writings

[Anonymous No.15820036]

>>15819878
refer here
http://www.penttilinkola.com/pentti_linkola/ecofascism/

[Anonymous No.15820100]

>>15816849
You post anime. Uncle Ted unpacked and dismantled your leftcuck atomized consoomer “culture”. Leaving you with nothing of value but an utterly fake and gay existence of cope. Stay mad, boy

[Anonymous No.15820483]

>>15816805
Quinissential midwit thinker for 20-something mediocrities that picked up /pol/ beliefs to cope with their dissatisfaction in life

[Anonymous No.15820504]

>>15820483
>pops antidepressant and writes poetry about feral coons ass ramming his mom while he jerks his dad off while wearing a fursuit.

That's how I see you spending your free time.

[Anonymous No.15820604]

>>15817038
reminder that ted was an incel virgin who thought about changing his gender to be able to feel a female body at least once

[Anonymous No.15820626]

>>15817333
it isn’t and never was influential outside of 4chan, nothing came out of it. keep larping

[Anonymous No.15820705]

>>15820036
Cool, but what does anything written there have to do with fascism? That appears to just be a third party deciding that Linkolas writings are ecofascist because he advocates state restrictions on population and active reduction

[Anonymous No.15820773]

>>15820626
It's becoming more influential and relevant every day

[Anonymous No.15820829]

>>15816849
kys animetard

[Anonymous No.15820832]

>>15820705
Bruh he despises democracy, wants a strictly controlled authoritarian government, is anti-individualist, anti-capitalist, need I say more?

[Anonymous No.15821189]

>>15820832
Yes because those characteristics would equally apply to a communist, they are typical aspects of a fascist government but not the key point of what defines fascism

[Anonymous No.15821305]

>>15818480
Technological Slavery contains ISAIF, read that first then Anti-Tech. I recommend all of his works but you should know that you can't unread what he asserts.

[Anonymous No.15821326]

>>15816849
Ted directly affirms this in Technological Slavery. Not the brainlet part, of course, but he had no illusions about originality. His singular goal was to expose the ideas present in his manifesto—original or not—to as large an audience as possible, and given that he managed to have ISAIF printed and distributed by the two largest newspapers in America, it's safe to say he succeeded.

[Anonymous No.15821371]

>>15818911
>Define technology
Read chapters one and two of Ellul's Technological Society (Ted's primary influence)—"Techniques," and "The Characterology of Technique." I'm not sure if Ted ever uses the term "technology" intending to express something other than Ellul's concept of technique, but it ultimately doesn't matter, as mentally substituting the latter for the former in Ted's writing almost always results in highly cogent arguments.

[Anonymous No.15821381]

>>15820604
thanks for reminding me that ted was based