/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21417183]

Can we discuss Ted Kaczynski? I mean how can one really dispute the credibility of th points made in the manifesto? Is there any other solution than the one provided?

[Anonymous No.21417199]

>>21417183
You can't dispute them because he only makes empirical observations that are themselves either true by nature or shown true through study. He basis his objection on values, so the only grounds one has to disagree with him is to simply object to his values. He doesn't put forth an ideal future or plans for policy or governance. He doesn't put forth any philosophy.
It is extremely basic.
>X causes A, B, C
>A, B, C, leads to P, Q, R
>I don't like P, Q, R
>If you don't like P, Q, R, destroy X

[Anonymous No.21417209]

>>21417199
bases*
A, B, C are effects exclusive to X, and X cannot be modified in any way. PQR <> x

[Anonymous No.21417224]

>>21417183
So should I kill myself? I personally despise x and feel like things have only gotten worse?

[Anonymous No.21417226]

>>21417224
Fed

[Anonymous No.21417227]

>>21417226
?

[Anonymous No.21417233]

merge with the machines

[Anonymous No.21417239]

*murders you for owning a computer store*
*dies in prison*

[Anonymous No.21417246]

>>21417239
>math prodigy
>decides to cut dick off
>doesn't
>moves innawoods for years
>goes on bombing spree
>???
wtf

[Anonymous No.21417260]

>>21417246
>decides to cut dick off
Why?

[Anonymous No.21417266]

>>21417183
>If I call capitalism technology I can make up new solutions that don’t involve the Previously laid out arguments
Yawn
>>21417260
He’s the OG autogynephile poltranny

[Anonymous No.21417274]

>>21417260
The US gov claimed he had gender dysphoria and overcame it.
>>21417266
He doesn't give a bullfuck about eternal serfdom or slavery. He opposes industrialism and the effects specific to it which include increasing power of large organizations, increased ability for the human race to harm the biosphere, possibility of new industrial technology with unforeseen consequences, etc. These problems don't go away under any marx-inspired system. He's also directly critical of collectivization.
You're actually a pseud, so just read the book before you look like a retard too. After reading you can come and make a real argument that might BTFO Kaczynski for good.

[Anonymous No.21417275]

i've never read his work but his general idea is that we should all remove modern electronic technology from our lives, right?
if that is the case, what are we supposed to do against an invasion force from a foreign aggressor that possesses the advanced technology that we abandoned?

[Anonymous No.21417277]

>>21417275
No, that's what he advises not to do. He specifically mentions this. I'll make a longer post in a little while.

[Anonymous No.21417278]

>>21417277
cheers anon, i'll wait

[Anonymous No.21417284]

I have no access to his work that isn't digital. I hate reading this way. What is his advice to readers, or does he even offer any? Is he just putting his observations into words?

[Anonymous No.21417287]

>>21417266
>If I call greed capitalism I can make up new solutions that don’t involve the Previously laid out arguments

[Anonymous No.21417288]

>>21417275
>[...] It would be hopeless for revolutionaries to try to attack the system without using SOME modern technology. If nothing else they must use the communications media to spread their message. [...]
>195. The revolution must be international and worldwide. It cannot be carried out on a nation-by-nation basis. Whenever it is suggested that the United States, for example, should cut back on technological progress or economic growth, people get hysterical and start screaming that if we fall behind in technology the Japanese will get ahead of us. Holy robots! The world will fly off its orbit if the Japanese ever sell more cars than we do! (Nationalism is a great promoter of technology.) More reasonably, it is argued that if the relatively democratic nations of the world fall behind in technology while nasty, dictatorial nations like China, Vietnam and North Korea continue to progress, eventually the dictators may come to dominate the world. That is why the industrial system should be attacked in all nations simultaneously, to the extent that this may be possible. True, there is no assurance that the industrial system can be destroyed at approximately the same time all over the world, and it is even conceivable that the attempt to overthrow the system could lead instead to the domination of the system by dictators. That is a risk that has to be taken. And it is worth taking, since the difference between a “democratic” industrial system and one controlled by dictators is small compared with the difference between an industrial system and a non-industrial one.[37] It might even be argued that an industrial system controlled by dictators would be preferable, because dictator-controlled systems usually have proved inefficient, hence they are presumably more likely to break down. Look at Cuba.
Don't have the paragraphs right now but the idea that he's trying to usher in an idealist anarcho-primitivist society is a retarded meme spread by shills and zoomers. He directly states the single and only problem: Industrial Society. If you get rid of only your technology it won't effect industrial society in any way. If you live in a forest, industrial society will continue to grow, adapt, improve, and expand its control over the Earth and human lives. He advises that one use any means possible and any technology required to take industrial society down. Becoming employed in industrial or political sites is also recommended for increasing your ability to destabilize the system from within.
Anyway, he says (and it's obvious anyway) that you can't avoid using technology in modern society. Even if you fuck off into the woods you'll get arrested at some point for trespassing, and if you buy your own land you'll need to earn money(with industrial society) to pay tax.

[Anonymous No.21417299]

>>21417183
No, Ted is 100% correct and there is no other solution. Anyone else that disagrees is either brainwashed, or a total conformist coward loser.

[Anonymous No.21417322]

>1. Become skilled in technological and scientific fields
>2. Hopefully get a job in a field related to administration, government, manufacturing, military, or industrial transport
>3. Learn hobbies related to survival and outdoorsmanship
>4. Buy remote land
>5. Life as normal, support whatever political movement you want(hopefully a destabilizing revolutionary one like communism or ethno-nationalism) or do nothing at all. Your choice.
>6. If a black swan event occurs or the industrial system has reached the point at which it can only perform maintenance of vital infrastructure, (oil drills, power plants, highways between these things) you must discern what sorts of activities are within your liberty that you may carry out to reduce the odds of industrial society recovering.
>7. If it recovers, too bad but at least you're alive, and perhaps your political group will take over in the ashes of the previous system.
I don't condone illegal acts.

[Anonymous No.21417327]

>>21417288
excellent and nice digits too
how he imagines people to take down industrial technology in all industrial societies around the world almost simultaneously seems herculean
maybe his trigger would be some kind of computer super virus or electrical grid killing device

[Anonymous No.21417810]

>>21417183
It's all built on a flimsy strawman and he had autism that made him go crazy from loud noises. You may be mentally deficient yourself, but for us normies there's a lot there that just doesn't make sense and basically pynchon's better.

[Anonymous No.21418097]

>>21417183
He correctly identifies problems in the modern society. But his solution is utterly awful. He was a sexually and mentally damaged high-functioning genius. His solution were so far removed from the average person. The power process only applies to high functioning people.

His definition of freedom is also wrong in my opinion. He tries to seperate freedom and permisiveness, this is impossible. He is right that men require participation in something, that is duty. Duty which must be enforced from above him and which he must enforce on those below him.

This is the book that accurately solved the issues Ted raised. I strongly recommend it. It resolves everything from ideal community organization to how to select for leaders and why.

[Anonymous No.21418112]

>>21417183
I read the manifesto and he talks like teenage alt-right Internet trolls talk. he was ahead of his time in that regard

[Anonymous No.21418129]

>>21417183
>Can we discuss Ted Kaczynski? I mean how can one really dispute the credibility of th points made in the manifesto? Is there any other solution than the one provided?

OMG TED SO COOL HE COPIED ELLUL BOOK AND MAKE CLAIMS THAT WERE MADE 1000 TIMES BEFORE HIM + HE KILLED POINTLESSY 3 PEOPLE NOT FOR HIS MISSION BUT BECASE HE WANTED TO KILL AS HE WROTE IT IN HIS JOURNEY WOW SO BASED

[Anonymous No.21418238]

I really need to know: do self-propagating structures result in entropy? This entropy becomes nature

[Anonymous No.21418289]

>>21417183
>muh technology
>muh niggers
>why doesn't society work for damaged psychos like me

Move out to the woods and die there, retard.

[Anonymous No.21418303]

>>21417288
What would a deindustrialized society look like if not something closer to anarcho-primitivism?

Forget the threat posed by other nations that choose to weild technology, what if there was some sort of cataclysmic event only an industurial society could cope with?

[Anonymous No.21418423]

>>21418238
Everything results in entropy. The only worthwhile action is one that reverses entropy.

>>21418303
The National-Socialists had a strong back-to-the-land undercurrent. Look in to that. Essentially large families with a focus on physicality and self-sustaining practices. Basicially removal of most forms of entertainment that relies on electricity, tv, radio, video games, etc.

[Anonymous No.21418451]

>>21418238
>>21418423
everything that happens is caused by entropy, even its reversal who be by a small probabilistic chance. Chaos is the real God.

[Anonymous No.21418474]

>>21418303
>What would a deindustrialized society look like if not something closer to anarcho-primitivism?
nations around the world weren't anarcho-primitive before the industrial revolution, anon

[Anonymous No.21418476]

>>21418451
That does not preclude engaging in actions that briefly halt or reverse entropy. I can think of no greater calling than that.

[Anonymous No.21418478]

>>21417183
How is it possible that this guy gets multiple threads a week

[Anonymous No.21418483]

>>21418478
Each thread just says the same stuff over over

[Anonymous No.21418493]

>>21418476
>together
>to divide and conquer all the scary colored people
pathetic

[Anonymous No.21418530]

>>21418493
Fear and disgust are not synonymous, anon. I am greatly disgusted that Europeans are mocked for showing any ethno-cultural unity and a will see their peoples increase.

Back on topic though, after all, if a revolution did happen and the West returned to a simpler way of living minorities would starve, die and eat each other since there would be no great surplus for them to leech off. It is an encouraging fact that only we, Europeans and their kin, have the ability to sustain a large self-sufficient population.

[Anonymous No.21418556]

>>21418530
>arabs
semites of any religion belong in asia. semites are an asian race. they are from asia, thats where they should be.

[Anonymous No.21418574]

>>21417183
He was hot when he was young. I would pay millions to fuck this man in the ass

[Anonymous No.21418623]

>>21418556
Who cares, they are a cancer. Cancers need to be purges from a healthy body.

[Anonymous No.21419074]

>>21418097
Good point. Kaczynski actually doesn't care about maximizing pleasure or happiness; his intent in destroying the industrial system. He believes that everything that industrial society does together makes it an intractable evil. If you care more about pleasuremaxxing than the idealistic conception of a ungranted freedom then you have a value misalignment with Kaczynski. You're not wrong, you just don't see Kaczynski's ideal good as a good thing and vice versa.
I'll see if I can make a longer post later.
>>21417810
>>21418112
cringe
>>21418238
That's very interesting but we would be playing a game here because there are many different concepts we refer to when we say nature, and you refer to something different from what Kac. refers to in his books.
>>21418289
lmao
>>21418303
Could be monarchy, tribalism, Athens was democratic, there were republics too. etc. Mostly any form of governance is possible. Keep in mind that Kacz. doesn't oppose non-organization dependent technology. (i.e., what a small community could develop together)
>>21418483
Same things every time
>Move into the woods
>Put your phone down lmao
>How technology bad?
Every time by people who didn't read.
>>21418574
Based and fuck young-ted-bussy-pilled

[Anonymous No.21419105]

>>21417183
he was only halfway there.
problem is not industrial revolution, its civilization

[Anonymous No.21419110]

>>21419074
>Good point. Kaczynski actually doesn't care about maximizing pleasure or happiness; his intent in destroying the industrial system. He believes that everything that industrial society does together makes it an intractable evil. If you care more about pleasuremaxxing than the idealistic conception of a ungranted freedom then you have a value misalignment with Kaczynski. You're not wrong, you just don't see Kaczynski's ideal good as a good thing and vice versa.

In no way did i suggest pleasure maxxing or comfort. Ted's work has no values beyond destruction. But he correctly identifies many problems but offers no solution for them. His ideal good is simply localism without electricity. Darre expands on a system wherein all the issues Ted highlights are addressed without tossing the baby out with the bath water.

Hope for a good convo, anonn

[Anonymous No.21419130]

>>21419110
Then I misunderstood. Forgive my retard brain, I've been reading too much sci-fi(ironically)
You're correct that his ideology is one of destruction solely, he says as much:
>200. Until the industrial system has been thoroughly wrecked, the destruction of that system must be the revolutionaries’ ONLY goal. Other goals would distract attention and energy from the main goal. More importantly if the revolutionaries permit themselves to have any other goal than the destruction of technology, they will be tempted to use technology as a tool for reaching that other goal. If they give in to that temptation, they will fall right back into the technological trap, because modern technology is a unified, tightly organized system, so that, in order to retain SOME technology, one finds oneself obliged to retain MOST technology, hence one ends up sacrificing only token amounts of technology.
His genuine political and ideological worldviews are mostly unknown because he doesn't want his views to pollute anti-industrialism(which of course, has only one goal).

[Anonymous No.21419143]

>>21417287
One of those things is an economic system and one of those things is a personality trait

[Anonymous No.21419147]

>>21419130
Read the book i have mentioned above. For life to thrive and improve there must be some element of struggle and hardship and it must be difficult enough to require dedicated effort, but it must not be too difficult to overcome. That is one of the core values that Ted overlooks in his world-concept, but one that is central to the National-Socialist worldview. Had Ted not been viciously unmade early in his life his thought might have expanded in to something more fully developed. Sadly one can easily understand his motivations for wanting to destroy.

I think we have discussed this before, anon.

[Anonymous No.21419170]

>>21419143
Is this 'economic system' in the room with us right now?

[Anonymous No.21419180]

>>21417183
Sup based Fed bro. You boys hiring? I'd love to get paid in order to shit post all day

[Anonymous No.21419185]

>>21419147
>33. Human beings have a need (probably based in biology) for something that we will call the power process. This is closely related to the need for power (which is widely recognized) but is not quite the same thing. The power process has four elements. The three most clear-cut of these we call goal, effort and attainment of goal. (Everyone needs to have goals whose attainment requires effort, and needs to succeed in attaining at least some of his goals.) The fourth element is more difficult to define and may not be necessary for everyone. We call it autonomy and will discuss it later (paragraphs 42-44).
>34. Consider the hypothetical case of a man who can have anything he wants just by wishing for it. Such a man has power, but he will develop serious psychological problems. At first he will have a lot of fun, but by and by he will become acutely bored and demoralized. Eventually he may become clinically depressed. History shows that leisured aristocracies tend to become decadent. This is not true of fighting aristocracies that have to struggle to maintain their power. But leisured, secure aristocracies that have no need to exert themselves usually become bored, hedonistic and demoralized, even though they have power. This shows that power is not enough. One must have goals toward which to exercise one’s power.
>35. Everyone has goals; if nothing else, to obtain the physical necessities of life: food, water and whatever clothing and shelter are made necessary by the climate. But the leisured aristocrat obtains these things without effort. Hence his boredom and demoralization.
>36. Non-attainment of important goals results in death if the goals are physical necessities, and in frustration if non-attainment of the goals is compatible with survival. Consistent failure to attain goals throughout life results in defeatism, low self-esteem or depression.
>37. Thus, in order to avoid serious psychological problems, a human being needs goals whose attainment requires effort, and he must have a reasonable rate of success in attaining his goals.
(Going to add another quote after this post)
I'll see if I can do a writeup on "Kaczynskian" freedom and permissiveness after work.
>Had Ted not been viciously unmade early in his life his thought might have expanded in to something more fully developed. Sadly one can easily understand his motivations for wanting to destroy.
Charged language, but that's your view.

[Anonymous No.21419192]

>>21419147
>40. In modern industrial society only minimal effort is necessary to satisfy one’s physical needs. It is enough to go through a training program to acquire some petty technical skill, then come to work on time and exert the very modest effort needed to hold a job. The only requirements are a moderate amount of intelligence and, most of all, simple OBEDIENCE. If one has those, society takes care of one from cradle to grave. (Yes, there is an underclass that cannot take the physical necessities for granted, but we are speaking here of mainstream society.) Thus it is not surprising that modern society is full of surrogate activities. These include scientific work, athletic achievement, humanitarian work, artistic and literary creation, climbing the corporate ladder, acquisition of money and material goods far beyond the point at which they cease to give any additional physical satisfaction, and social activism when it addresses issues that are not important for the activist personally, as in the case of white activists who work for the rights of nonwhite minorities. These are not always PURE surrogate activities, since for many people they may be motivated in part by needs other than the need to have some goal to pursue. Scientific work may be motivated in part by a drive for prestige, artistic creation by a need to express feelings, militant social activism by hostility. But for most people who pursue them, these activities are in large part surrogate activities. For example, the majority of scientists will probably agree that the “fulfillment” they get from their work is more important than the money and prestige they earn.
>41. For many if not most people, surrogate activities are less satisfying than the pursuit of real goals (that is, goals that people would want to attain even if their need for the power process were already fulfilled). One indication of this is the fact that, in many or most cases, people who are deeply involved in surrogate activities are never satisfied, never at rest. Thus the money-maker constantly strives for more and more wealth. The scientist no sooner solves one problem than he moves on to the next. The long-distance runner drives himself to run always farther and faster. Many people who pursue surrogate activities will say that they get far more fulfillment from these activities than they do from the “mundane” business of satisfying their biological needs, but that is because in our society the effort needed to satisfy the biological needs has been reduced to triviality. More importantly, in our society people do not satisfy their biological needs AUTONOMOUSLY but by functioning as parts of an immense social machine. In contrast, people generally have a great deal of autonomy in pursuing their surrogate activities.

>central to the National-Socialist Worldview
Ted definitely agrees with that part.

[Anonymous No.21419196]

>>21419185
Please dont quote huge amounts of his manifesto again, it was definately you i argued with last time. I have read his manifesto fully. You need not tell me about it.

There is the air of cultist about you. That the word of Ted is not open to interpetation or change, that it is revalation and to be taken as orthodoxy.

[Anonymous No.21419199]

Is Ted the worst writer to get posted here regularly? His ideas aside, his style is soooo boring. If he were more lively he wouldn’t have had to send those bombs to get published.

[Anonymous No.21419205]

>>21419196
Trying to jog your memory because you evidently didn't remember his statement on the subject
lmao

[Anonymous No.21419209]

>>21419147
>>21419196
You're brainlet trash, and that wasn't the same person you were arguing with before. I've only entered this thread now.

[Anonymous No.21419249]

>>21417183
>I mean how can one really dispute the credibility of th points made in the manifesto?
In complete seriousness, his manifesto should be required reading for high school students. Regardless of whether you agree or disagree, everyone should at least be exposed to the concept of technological progress as a negative force.

[Anonymous No.21419272]

>>21419199
>THE LIBERAL MEDIA DOESNT WANT TO RETURN TO MONKE SO THE LIBERALS DO LIBERAL STUFF FOR FAGS
It's so fucking awful, and everyone is so /pol/ that they can't even see it.
>What do you mean this reads like a talk radio show from the 90s? It's the most lucid thing I've read in my entire life, how unreasonable can you be?

[Anonymous No.21419281]

THOUGHTS ON “SURROGATE ACTIVITIES”: THE BROKEN CLOCK OF TED KACZYNSKI AND THE NEXT GREAT ADVANCEMENT IN MENTAL HEALTH COMPREHENSION


The subject of Ted Kaczynski and his so-called ‘Manifesto’, really: ‘Industrial Society and its Future’, crossed my desk some months ago and I confess it took some time to catch-up on the local comprehension of Kaczynski and the views of him amongst the contemporary society. I will say that I agreed with many of his observations on the flaws of, what was in his day, an already bloated pseudo-technocracy which had subverted much of the lawful process of democratic discourse, but I will say also that those observations of his; widely purported to be an advocacy of primitivism, are meaningless by comparison to what was recognizable immediately to myself as the real strike of insight or the “broken clock being right twice a day (i.e. wrong all the time apart from this)” that were his observations on, what he termed, “Surrogate Activities” and this text, will be a summary of that put into its correct context as, as I will argue here, a bridge between the works of Freud and Reich to the contemporary present – most notably Surrogate Activities ought be read alongside Reich’s take-down of Hitlerism ‘The Mass Psychology of Fascism’, a work banned and burned by Nazis, Communists and American Liberals alike, in order to bring the various subjects discussed in both works into the full clarity of bifocal vision.


Let us begin, then, with the basics of psychiatry: the notion of poor, self-sabotaging and unwanted behaviors in the self being psychosomatic conditions established in childhood through malformative traumas; abuse or neglect at the hand of a parent or some figure in authority early on in our lives being never resolved and so lingering along into adulthood; forming, then, the individual foundation of asocial, antisocial, anxiety and pathological depressive disorders (or, to us, just: Pathos) and all related cognitive impairments stemming from them; dissonance, etc.

Surrogate Activities, recognized by Kaczynski only in its political expression, can be understood entirely as the ‘matured’ version of a persons long-held and deeply-ingrained psychosomatic childhood or early-life trauma which, being unresolved and largely unrecognized, has gone on to form the basis of their adult personality – a disjointed state of thinking rife with cognitive traumas, consider the manner of ‘treatment’ of the contemporary anxiety or depressive disorder (a common epidemic in the contemporary society) by which the disorder and its causes are not treated at all and merely ‘subdued’ in some temporary manner with SSRI pharmaceuticals; a soft-temporary chemical lobotomy we might call this, whereupon the disorder is not treated but the mind is saturated in chemical narcotic to dull the senses of the individual to itself, to its actions and to its surroundings.

1/

[Anonymous No.21419283]

>>21419199
>soooo
hole and/or faggot detected

[Anonymous No.21419292]

In true psychiatry (that is: verbatim to the works of Freud and psychoanalytic formula) the notion of lobotomy or chemical lobotomy is anathema primarily because it is like amputating a hand because the fingernails need trimming, or more closer in analogy: to dress and bandage an infected wound without bothering to clean away the bacteria of the wound first. William Reich, of course, has much to say on the matter of ‘repressing and suppressing (by defacto also: oppressing)’ the trauma basis, that being the trauma basis which to us is the bacteria in the wound or the over-long fingernails in those two given analogies.

Surrogate Activities, then, comprise the outward manifestation of this ‘untreated wound’ in the psyche of an individual; their life becomes devoted toward finding the true cause of their ailment but their attention is drawn to external grand narratives (hijacked by political actors, who are themselves certainly driven by the same pathos), in what Kaczynski recognized correctly as being political false-pretenses, whereupon some political goal is espoused by a person; “i am angry because of this, this and this,” but really they are just looking for an excuse to vent their destructive emotionalism upon something or somebody, again see: Mass Psychology of Fascism as the perfect case study on Hitlerism in its national denialism of personal responsibility for its circumstances and the eager externalization of the cause of its circumstances onto third parties. We recognize this immediately when considering the overtly authoritarian leaning towards such peoples and it is perhaps easier for our sensibilities to recognize this at all when only speaking of empires and states long since dead and so able to be talked about frankly; Kaczynski, however, described much of this as ‘Leftism’ or ‘Left-ish (as in: sort of ‘Left’ but not really) activists (and persons)’, but this is his error; as I title this text with “the broken clock of Ted Kaczynski” it is this specific instance of short-sightedness which warrants that title; because it is plainly fallacious to recognize the mental health deterioration of one person which brings him or her to the Surrogate Activities of ‘Leftism’ and to pretend as if the same pathways which brings another person to the Surrogate Activities of ‘Rightism’ is not identical in formation and expression; from the seed of the trauma basis to the festering of the unclean wound, and so on from there.

2/

[Anonymous No.21419296]

The question which follows from this conclusion, that being: “Do we equate this with ‘all politics’, then?” is a good question and perhaps the most important to be covered in this subject as no political party would consent for a moment to consider that their membership comprised the mentally ill; it is such considerations as to their efficacy that, I feel, resulted in William Reichs books being seized and burned by all three major ideologies in his day. So I will, since I pose this question myself, attempt to convey that of any political party (or let us say, of any group of people) the conclusion that follows that it is ‘not’ that “all ambition” is a result of mental illness but that “all ambition gone about ineptly” certainly is. The reason for this is that the focus of a person who uses politics or religion or whatever as a false-pretense for venting their traumas onto others around them is not ‘thinking’ of the organization or the goals of the organization itself, their goal is not in harmony with it; that is: they are merely pretending, and rather in their actions they are abusing that organization and damaging it greatly in order to scratch their own unbearable itch, as it were, that ‘itch’ which stems from the unresolved trauma basis which, for lack of remedy, has subsumed their rational senses; in effect having driven them slightly mad.

3/

[Anonymous No.21419302]

Now, of this I feel that ‘politics’ is the least important area to be considered; politics after all is always going to be an expression of the inhabitants of a city-state itself (be it in their lethargy to permit ill-rule or be it in their eagerness to get themselves destroyed by waging foolish wars) and so is beyond any individuals capacity to ever really control, but far more important is the aspect of interpersonal group dynamics when considering the path and progression of the Surrogate Activities of an afflicted person or groups of persons, as the processes of mass political action operates the same amongst any group of people or any organization; business or leisure. If a person, one or more, within the group is nurturing some trauma basis; notably recognized by a depressive ‘nay-say’ disposition, then they are influencing and shaping the group already to pernicious ends without necessarily needing to realize what it is that they are doing; that is: the ‘itch’ is their primary concern – nothing else is – and they gain a sense of temporary relief by engaging in asocial and antisocial activities upon those around themselves. It is not entirely the same in application; to compare a bad political actor to a bad social actor, indeed the political actor can do worse, but the social actor is far more numerous and is, anyway, a mere roll of the dice away from entering politics when the notion enters their deranged minds – we have observed this lately with the ‘digital social media’ problem where synonymity between the two areas has become more commonplace.


4/

[Anonymous No.21419308]

What is the solution to this, then? This is the last question of this text and I offer my own conclusions. Ultimately I think there is no legislative approach to this (e.g. ban this, this and this) that will not exacerbate the problem, and that it ought be understood that ‘merely’ these greatly harmful influences upon our societies are the consequence of parental and adult errors wrought, in ignorance, upon the very young; a thing I am sure will be with us for many centuries into the future until we bring about, one day, that society of polymaths (as I believe is as inevitable as a rising sun) who are too intelligent not understand and treat these problems with innate compassion. Or, if I may say it less poetically, it would be considered as normal and as every-day-a-thing to prevent future infection by self-care as to wash ones hands after using the toilet – to ensure, that is: that the trauma basis does not fester like bacteria in a wound and overcome by subsummation the rational senses of any innocent child to produce, then, the mad adult who we encounter as the criminal, the depressive, the pathos-stricken and the crazed political actor or the audience, equally crazed, who enables it. We might, then, consider all of this as being simply akin to daily self-care; we might stare in horror and sympathy, for example, at the deformities of a person whose bones are crippled by iron or calcium deficiency but we are staring in horror a long untreated ailment which they bitterly wish somebody had helped them overcome long ago; the society at one time did not know any better about the workings of diseases upon the body and the mind, mental illness was considered as possession by literal demons not even so very long ago and still in some parts of our contemporary world (and many casually declare demonic possession of their political or religious opposites; as if these were merely pejorative terms), likewise easily preventable diseases from unsanitary living and working conditions constituted the proliferation of viral epidemics: things we have learned of the cause of and things we have today long since eradicated through preventative measures. In all these instances we must learn to understand, exactly as we did with the discovery of bacteria by innovation of the microscope glass, that what we cannot necessarily always see with the untrained or unaided eye – seeing only, as it were, the late stage festering of an incubated disease; when it becomes the most obvious – is nonetheless ‘there’ and expressing itself to us like the uppermost successive perturbations of an ocean wave rocking a boat.
val.

ii. kal. ianuari. sol.
“rejoice [at having been] snatched from a grave illness!”
Galerius Valerius Maximinus Aug.

5/5

>>21417183
>Can we discuss Ted Kaczynski
sure,

>>21419281
>>21419292
>>21419296
>>21419302

[Anonymous No.21419390]

>>21419272
>MONKE
Monkeigh?!

[Anonymous No.21419559]

>>21417183
What’s there to discuss?

[Anonymous No.21419763]

>>21419308
Even if we assume that Kaczynski was entirely mentally broken, what he notes about industrial society is irrefutably true; and although one may not care about those effects (as a racist may not care about a lack of diversity or a communist may not care about a lack of free enterprise) he nevertheless offers a solution which would eliminate those specific problems. He does not assume all of his problems are caused by external factors, nor does he ever say that the destruction of the industrial system will create an ideal world; that would be absolutely indefensible. He, again, merely correctly notes several issues with society today arising from a very specific condition, and the way to solve it.

The author ironically displays the same psychoanalytical propagandizing that Kaczynski alludes to. The industrial system, and anyone that conforms mentally to the industrial system, will assume all deviations to result from mental illness; this psychobabble is unfortunately not a refutation. That being said, I did enjoy reading it and he did bring up fairly interesting observations; there is no doubt some level of this phenomenon occurring on a worlwide basis, but its practical use is limited by its pseudoscientific and psychoanalytical nature.