convince me that uncle Ted was not right. Only answer if you read him, don't want to hear the opinion of retards

>>509952848 (OP)
>For a period of several weeks in 1966, Kaczynski experienced intense sexual fantasies of being female and decided to undergo gender transition.

I read his whole book. He was right about what technology has done to the world but he's wrong about the solution. We can't just get rid of technology. That's not how humans work. Gotta figure out a better way forward.

>>509953306
The problem will solve itself once we run out of fossil fuels. Actually it could end before then.

>>509953306
The problem will solve itself once we run out of fossil fuels. Actually it could end before then if the anti-vaccine schizos are right about prions (approximately 10 year latency period after exposure).

>>509952848 (OP)
Every society that gives up technology will be dominated politically, economically and militarily by those that don't, making the position untenable.

>>509952848 (OP)
His theory was right.
His conclusion was messianic kindergarten nonsense.
Anyone who tries to sell you some kind of idealized state is high or psychotic.

>>509953306
>We can't just get rid of technology

>“Every complex society depends on an elaborate network of supporting subsystems. This makes it inherently vulnerable to disruption. Small failures can cascade into a general collapse.”
>“Historical precedent shows that large systems can collapse when they exhaust their resources or lose the loyalty of their populations. Technological society is no exception.”
>“It is true that attacking such a system requires patience, organization, and a clear strategy. But given sufficient time, a committed movement can bring it down.”

>Gotta figure out a better way forward.

>“No reforms, however sweeping, can make modern technology compatible with human freedom. To the extent that you have technological development, you must have a society organized to support it. That organization inherently requires tight control over human behavior.”
>“People believe they can ‘fix’ industrial society. But they fail to see that every fix only shifts problems elsewhere or creates new ones. The basic dynamic remains unchanged.”

directly quoted

>>509952956
lol you had this canned and ready to go. not an argument
>>509953707
He advocated for a collapse of the system that would necessarily be global, not that any one society should forgo tech

>>509953846
what do you think his conclusion was, what is the idealized state?

>>509954086
Ok, have fun listening to the tranny

>>509953625
>“If the system is allowed to collapse chaotically on its own, the consequences will be worse. The collapse will be uncontrolled, possibly total, leading to the extinction of humanity or the irreversible destruction of the biosphere. An organized effort to hasten the collapse can at least prepare the ground for something better.”
>“We must not simply wait for the system to break down by itself. This is because when it does collapse, it will do so under the worst possible conditions. Proactive resistance increases the likelihood of a less catastrophic transition.”

literally every single thread on Ted is constituted by 99/100 replies that either don't even deal with the point of his work or if they do are already addressed in it but few read it

case in point, Ted being "anti-tech": no, his works deal with industrial society, so not tech, but organization dependent technology, ODT; fire, bows and plows aren't ODT, drones are

>>509954203
hey i've heard it all before, but I'm willing to bet if you wrote all your most embarrassing thoughts down throughout all stages of life, everyone would think you're a faggot too
Is this the best you got?

>>509953707
>“Suppose that the leaders of some country or region came to the conclusion that industrial society was no good, and decided to renounce further industrial development. In that case, the industrially advanced countries would have them at a military and economic disadvantage, so that the renouncing country would be forced to fall into line with the rest of the world.”

thus

>“Only a determined worldwide movement aimed at the collapse of technological society has any hope of succeeding.”

>>509952848 (OP)
His analysis of the psychology of leftism is incredible. Once you see it in them, it all makes sense. It doesn't make me hate them any less, though.

>>509954447
Unlike Uncle Ted I've never had intense thoughts about being a woman

>>509954086

Look at the Native Americans, whom Ted greatly admired.

And look at how they were nearly wiped out due to smallpox and typhus, had their important and sacred animals hunted into near extinction, were killed and assimilated relentlessly, and were eventually driven into sanctuaries like cattle, nowadays being in joyless limbo in a system that does not know what to do with them, with most being alcoholic, checked out, and depressed.

A technological system collapse cannot ever possibly be global. Any man who has seen history knows what happens to those who do not advance and innovate. You cannot get every country to give up nuclear weapons, how do you expect 8 billion people to give up all technology (3 billion of whom are dependent on fertilized agriculture alone)?

>>509954062

>“Every complex society depends on an elaborate network of supporting subsystems. This makes it inherently vulnerable to disruption. Small failures can cascade into a general collapse.”
>“Historical precedent shows that large systems can collapse when they exhaust their resources or lose the loyalty of their populations. Technological society is no exception.”
>“It is true that attacking such a system requires patience, organization, and a clear strategy. But given sufficient time, a committed movement can bring it down.”

He's wrong. Humans are an inventing species. If we get rid of industrial technology someone else will just reinvent it later. The only salvation is to push technological development in a direction that actually benefits mankind. Invent things to help people rather than exploit them like the jews are doing. We have to push forward

>>509952848 (OP)
This is what happened to me when i was young, and died in minecraft hardcore mode after building so much stuff and just looking at the red screen after my character death thinking, if it was worth it all that i had build, all that i had archieved, because im just a man

>>509952848 (OP)
you uncle ted worshippers might be literally retarded, lil bros.

>>509954204
I don't think we have enough fossil fuels available to totally destroy the biosphere before we collapse. Perhaps I'm wrong though. We're looking at around 50 more years at current consumption rates.

>This is because when it does collapse, it will do so under the worst possible conditions.
Collapses always under the worst possible conditions. desu I'd prefer an uncontrolled collapse over a controlled one. One of the worst possible scenarios that could occur is if the same people running things today are able to, using a controlled demolition of the system, retain their status following the collapse.

>>509952848 (OP)
>the modern way of life makes men suffer because they can't fulfill their need for power :(
>the solution will kill billions of people, but hey, that's necessary for our cause :)
The later part of his book is completely unhinged

>>509954310
>literally every single thread on Ted is constituted by 99/100 replies that either don't even deal with the point of his work or if they do are already addressed in it but few read it
I know, thats why I try to directly quote him in hopes that they'll realize that they are retards. Don't have to argue myself lol
>case in point, Ted being "anti-tech": no, his works deal with industrial society, so not tech, but organization dependent technology, ODT; fire, bows and plows aren't ODT, drones are

>“We distinguish between small-scale technology that can be used by small-scale communities without calling forth any tendency to organize on a large scale, and organization-dependent technology that tends to lead to large-scale organization. Bows and arrows, for example, are small-scale technology; the space shuttle is organization-dependent technology.”

>>509952848 (OP)
he wasnt right to be a murderous tranny- regardless of his political views

>>509954870
he was a retard himself.
Unable to hide the evidences, almost like he signed his manifesto

>>509952848 (OP)
he accomplished nothing but alienating people to his ideas that is just "tech le bad"
while making high tech bombs to....do nothing I guess.

technology isn't bad, kikes are.
he was better off trooning out

>>509952848 (OP)
Dude put twigs and leaves in his bombs to cope with the cognitive dissonance of using technology (the bombs) to fight technological progress. High IQ =/= coherent world-view.

>>509952848 (OP)
Against your wishes I will answer- more right than any contemporary.

Ted was a very smart man and he deserves a lot of credit for highlighting the problems with modern society. He also correctly predicted the rise of (((tech lords))) like Jeff Bezos. The solution though has to be to steer technology in a more responsible direction. We can't just chimp out and smash all of our computers.

>>509954597
So it's the same magical thinking the commies advocated. 'If everybody just voluntarily came around to our way of thinking, look what we could achieve.'
That didn't help the fault. If that's the requirement, then the position is still untenable.

>>509954734
>If we get rid of industrial technology someone else will just reinvent it later
not necessarily, not if the collapse is thorough enough, the amount of readily available usable energy-rich resources that was present at the kickstart of the industrial revolution is gone, the system effectively runs on its energetic momentum, a global collapse might very well make starting the system again impossible

>>509954734
>He's wrong. Humans are an inventing species. If we get rid of industrial technology someone else will just reinvent it later

>“Humans are inventive by nature, and technological development will always tempt people. That is why the collapse of the system must be followed by measures to prevent its resurgence.”
thus
>“To prevent reindustrialization, it will be necessary to destroy not only the physical infrastructure of the system but also the knowledge and records on which it depends. This includes scientific and technical literature, data archives, and blueprints.”
>“Any surviving educational or research institutions devoted to technological knowledge must be dismantled or reoriented.”
>“The movement must work to instill values that reject technological progress as a goal. Only by fostering a culture hostile to reindustrialization can we avoid the cycle repeating itself.”
>“It will also be necessary to break up large populations and scatter them so that no sufficient concentration of resources and skilled people remains to restart technological development.”

>The only salvation is to push technological development in a direction that actually benefits mankind

>“The system is so interconnected and self-reinforcing that any attempt to reshape it will fail because the system’s internal logic compels it to develop in certain directions.”

>>509954685
You don't need to make countries agree to anything, you hit the system where it hurts. It wouldn't look like some direct confrontation between the revolutionaries and the system's goons, that's silly. The system is likely to undergo some severe stress in the near future that will leave it in a weakened state. No one can predict what that'll look like exactly. The work right now is to organize the Anti-tech movement.

>>509952956
>source: a seething FBI agent
Kek

>>509955485
To what end? Are we just supposed to never invent anything again? Stop solving problems? That's not what we are. No what we need to do is to change our goals as a society. Technology should ONLY be invented for the purpose of making life better. If it doesn't fundementally improve the human expirence it should be seen as useless to us. What we have now are a bunch of narcissist little rats steering technology. People like Zuckerberg who are only interested in control. They are the problem not technology. Tech bros should not be in charge of humanity.

>>509955366
>If everybody just voluntarily came around to our way of thinking, look what we could achieve
true
>“The revolution against the system will not succeed if it depends on everyone voluntarily changing their minds or abandoning technology. It must be forced upon society through determined action.”
thus
>“This is not a matter of everyone suddenly agreeing to reject technology. Revolution always involves conflict and coercion. The system is maintained by powerful interests who will resist.”

>>509952848 (OP)
I've read the entire manifesto, but no more than that. Apparently Ted was unsatisfied with the version that was published, I hope this is the case because it was deeply flawed. He also never presents a solution in the manifesto and closes it off with very basic revolutionary responses like 'only use technology for the purposes of destroying technology' he also advocates destroying all research and the means to produce it. Ted at no point in the book makes a clear distinction between what is considered bad and good tech. The example he uses is a refrigerator, he mentions that it's impossible to build one on your own therefore it's worse than simply salt curing food. Ted is astute in recognizing how technocracy works by dividing labor and making sure every facet of production can't distribute the materials needed for assembly from one point to avoid creating rogue monopolies. So he basically intends on going back to roughly medieval tech. He was very prescient and able to see the threat of automation and extremely against computers, he also says that humans are nothing more than electrical impulses so his defense of humanity is purely based in tribalism but he doesn't advocate for any unity he just wants people to attack laboratories and wants people to have like 20 kids to raise them as soldiers for this crusade. He has some interesting comments on history, nothing too crazy, he mentions the British Raj being less despotic than modern nation-states because technology and transport allows state to essentially annihilate time and space. He also mentions things like sublimation and the power process and that humans essentially haven't evolved past tribalism. I think Ted's narrative has utterly failed, most people now would rather have automation rather than immigration, they would let AI run everything if it meant kicking out immigrants.

>>509952848 (OP)
he was pretty much spot on with the power process.

>>509954879
You can't focus on just one threat. The systems we've built feed off of each other in subtle ways. Their interactions with the biosphere may not become apparent until it's too late.
A controlled collapse is no collapse at all, at least with respect to the collapse of the system. The systems of control, surveillance, force, rapid communication, and long-distance travel would be the targets of this collapse. Without those, anyone grasping for power would be left with pre-industrial methods which would necessarily limit their geographical scope. They would then need to build themselves up to the next industrial revolution to get what we see today. That's too complicated to prevent, so the best course of action is to collapse the system we have now and let future humans deal with the next threat.

>>509956022
technique comes always with a double edge, more problems to solve with further techniques, it's self-replicating, the homo erectus who invented fire to cook had some descendant who used it to burn down an enemy village, the homo sapiens who invented the bow to hunt small game had some relative who used it to kill, those who became aware of this will have invented armor, armor leads to further development in warfare, more warfare leads to more technique
it never ends, you can't invent "one-sided tech", it's almost ontologically impossible

nevertheless, Ted's all about ODT, not getting rid of technology in general

>>509954870
Nufag try lurk longer, Ted wrote about his mk experience, he says it was a weird interview and silly questionnaire, you had literal midwit glowniggers trying to mind control someone who was a genius, same like all the brilliant FBI experts profiled the Unabomber as a dumb highschool graduate who never had a job or left his house

>>509952848 (OP)
Whether he is right or wrong, doesnt really matter a lot. The cat is out of the bag, genie out of the bottle, whatever you want to term it and its not going back

>>509956022
Moron maybe you should actually read his work cos every fucking thing you've cee asking is answered on depth

>>509956466
This is learned helplessness. You can do something right now if you think he's right. Tell your buddies what you know.

>>509956326
This innawoods shit is kinda romantic but leads to nothing (well unless you got internet and a nice titcow). Burgers dont seem to be that sensitive when it comes to privacy but i enoy that, it is like going inna woods and leave the world behind.

its nonsense and you have to be low intelligence to fancy over what this guy said

once you overthrow the jews we get rid of sociopathy fix every ibnjustice and corruption and build whtie heaven in europe

little is impossible if you put your mind to it. he was too retarded to simply say : Jews.

its the problem with autists who believe theres no god, morals or potential afterlife, he had no concept of pascals wager type of shit, no idea about using science to drive the gene pool into higher intelligence and empathy.

just a constant stream of whining, pessimism, certainty, nihlism, giveupism and self righteousness. as much as he might have moment self control, he was long term impulsive. everything has a cost i guess

imagine being so retarded that you cant automatically hypothesize with your instinctive brain in a couple of seconds tops several ideas about how to make up for the lack of old school selection in society. simply a midwit who thinks he was hot shit because of his iq score, prolly psyopped since MKULTRAd as well, government job, maybe they killed some people they needed to get ride of and the whole manifesto is fucking bullshit

he's alive and drinking beer with hitler and epstein in argentina right now

>>509956437
>b-but he wrote about it and said all it was was an interview and a survey you nufag!
i'm sure he remembers it all very well and that was totally accurate. ted is actually very based for a glownigger experimental prototype white terrorist.
lmao

>>509956234
Lol you are a retard and are making up stupid shit he never said or even implied

>>509956571
I just don't think his solutions are realistic. He's right that we need a revolution but it should be a revolution against the people who have used technology to destroy the world. Not the technology itself. I actually agree with a lot of what he said I just think he's drawing the wrong conclusions from it.

>>509956622
non sequitur

>>509956768
Do you want quotes?

>>509956672
>he's alive and drinking beer with hitler and epstein in argentina right now

Or wine because that hits faster.

>>509952848 (OP)
>convince me that uncle Ted was not right.
Sure -- opting out of technological progress is not an option. If you do, then you are simply taken over by whatever country or people decides not to follow suit. And then they enslave you and you are subjected to that same technology you were attempting to avoid in the first place. Only now you're a slave.

The only way his ideas work is if the entire world, in unison, agrees and then for some reason abandons all instinct for a territorialism and greed. -- which would be necessary so a single country/people doesn't decide to go after technology and then take over the world and then enslave the rest of the world.

>>509956807
DId you just throw that in so nonchalantly like i dunno your mother gets to work for your tendies?

>>509956717
Yeah I'm sure the retards at the govt can create a spooky mind control system to trick people smarter than they will ever be...
Lmao

>>509956717
what's the counter evidence. go ahead. is it some tabloid article, fucking retard

>>509956812
>so his defense of humanity is purely based in tribalism but he doesn't advocate for any unity he just wants people to attack laboratories and wants people to have like 20 kids to raise them as soldiers for this crusade.
Yeah for this retardation, doubt anyone read further anyway

>>509956965
>y-you can't mind control a literal genius you chud
okay, stupid.
>>509957003
>tabloid article
the article was stating the facts. it's common knowledge.
and if you think it isn't you should probably try to disprove it somehow.

>>509956965
yes they can its especially easy on gneiuses who think they re geniuses they re is nothing easier to manipulate than egocentric anrcissistics who think they cant fail you fucking idiot

>>509954062
Half of what Teddy said was because he was hungry in his cabin tripping on shrooms or smt.

Dude killed people and basically blackmailed society so at least someone would read his shitposts.

Now you fags will argue about anything even tho this guy could never hold a job.

>>509952848 (OP)
Is it true his victims were kikes?

>>509957067
>157. Assuming that industrial society survives, it is likely that technology will eventually acquire something approaching complete control over human behavior. It has been established beyond any rational doubt that human thought and behavior have a largely biological basis. As experimenters have demonstrated, feelings such as hunger, pleasure, anger and fear can be turned on and off by electrical stimulation of appropriate parts of the brain. Memories can be destroyed by damaging parts of the brain or they can be brought to the surface by electrical stimulation. Hallucinations can be induced or moods changed by drugs. There may or may not be an immaterial human soul, but if there is one it clearly is less powerful that the biological mechanisms of human behavior. For if that were not the case then researchers would not be able so easily to manipulate human feelings and behavior with drugs and electrical currents.

Please tell me how I should interpret this.

>>509956234
>I've read the entire manifesto, but no more than that. Apparently Ted was unsatisfied with the version that was published, I hope this is the case because it was deeply flawed.
that's why he published "anti tech revolution: why and how

>He also never presents a solution in the manifesto
>“The only solution is to reject the industrial system altogether and return to wild nature, not necessarily to primitive living, but to a low-technology way of life compatible with freedom.”

>closes it off with very basic revolutionary responses like 'only use technology for the purposes of destroying technology' he also advocates destroying all research and the means to produce it.
>“The goal is not destruction for its own sake, but the prevention of a future in which human beings are permanently subjugated by technology. A planned, intelligent resistance movement is needed.”

>Ted at no point in the book makes a clear distinction between what is considered bad and good tech.
>“We distinguish between small-scale technology that can be used by small-scale communities without calling forth any tendency to organize on a large scale, and organization-dependent technology that tends to lead to large-scale organization. Bows and arrows, for example, are small-scale technology; the space shuttle is organization-dependent technology.”

>The example he uses is a refrigerator, he mentions that it's impossible to build one on your own therefore it's worse than simply salt curing food.
>“Organization-dependent technologies require centralized control and vast coordination. Autonomous technologies can be built, maintained, and used by individuals or small communities.”

1/2

anything that blames anything other than jews controlling everything is a jewish psyop by default, so anyone who believe sin anything other than jews, is by default mindcontrolled

>>509956672
Even if you exterminate all the kikes, you are left with the same tools for surveillance, coercion, rapid-communication, and long-distance travel. The next group of psychopaths will take the mantle and would arguably do a better job. That's not something I'd like to see. I'd much rather get rid of those oppressive technologies altogether and let people sort shit out like we used to.

>>509957461
This, Imagine what the jews planning on doing with AI. Its a shame because if we controlled we could probably cure cancer or solve faster than light travel....

>>509957159
No no no, don't squirm your way out of this one. Go ahead and link the article. Or, are you saying that the source the author of the article used was "common knowledge"?

>>509954870
hardly see how this is an issue. the experience radicalized him, as it used at the time extremely modern advancements to do questionable things.

>>509957067
>204. Revolutionaries should have as many children as they can. There is strong scientific evidence that social attitudes are to a significant extent inherited. No one suggests that a social attitude is a direct outcome of a person’s genetic constitution, but it appears that personality traits are partly inherited and that certain personality traits tend, within the context of our society, to make a person more likely to hold this or that social attitude. Objections to these findings have been raised, but the objections are feeble and seem to be ideologically motivated. In any event, no one denies that children tend on the average to hold social attitudes similar to those of their parents. From our point of view it doesn’t matter all that much whether the attitudes are passed on genetically or through childhood training. In either case they ARE passed on.

Or this.

>135. In paragraph 125 we used an analogy of a weak neighbor who is left destitute by a strong neighbor who takes all his land by forcing on him a series of compromises. But suppose now that the strong neighbor gets sick, so that he is unable to defend himself. The weak neighbor can force the strong one to give him his land back, or he can kill him. If he lets the strong man survive and only forces him to give the land back, he is a fool, because when the strong man gets well he will again take all the land for himself. The only sensible alternative for the weaker man is to kill the strong one while he has the chance. In the same way, while the industrial system is sick we must destroy it. If we compromise with it and let it recover from its sickness, it will eventually wipe out all of our freedom.

Or this.

>>509957483
jews have international networks, whip the fuck out of their chidlren etc, have coutnless traits that would make them much worse than any whites psychopaths who are in it to make a few bucks

furthermore whtie psychopaths ar enot fueled by boudless hatred and genocidal intent like jews are and would benefit from a more intelligent society that produces higher quality goods, arts, with stronger smart ass people. whites even the psychopaths ar emsart enough to work with truth, hearts and minds and know acting morals will trickle down benefits higher than acting like a monkey hopefulyl in this day and age

regardless they would be less dangerous and once the jews ar egone we would simpyl move to the next trheat, which is psychopathic (or not) assholes who are not working for the greater good.

you re doing the classic jewish move ( you are a jew btw) of sayign that its not the jews or that we shouldnt stop the jews because it wouldnt solve everything and there ar eother problems. YES Mr Einstein, there are other problems and we ll move to thes eother problems once we ve dealth with the most important problem. and it will be easier because we will have less problems by now.

do you not take showers because you are going to be dirty again tomorrow? or that after showering you l lhave to clean your dishes so you might as well do neither?

>>509957461

Yes every single problem would magically vanish along with the jews. Congrats on being retarded.

>>509952848 (OP)
Polska krew

>>509957896
majority yeah. you underestimate the tentacles and reach of the jews, be it by the problems they cause, or the problems they dont solve, or the problems not solved by white people that do not exist yet should

>>509957731
>Or, are you saying that the source the author of the article used was "common knowledge"?
that is exactly what i'm saying. it's commonly known. you should do a little research on it yourself.
>>509957744
>hardly see how a man being experimented on by glownigger mind controllers and becoming a spooky terrorist is an issue.
it's because you might be retarded, lil bro.

>>509957896
or solved by whit epeople that exist yet are kneecaped mentally by the jews, or busy thinking on how to overthrow the jews etc etc, or how ,much more educated they should be in the first place if they didnt braiwnash everyone to make ppl stupider instead of the opposite

why woudl they care aftrall if seek to fuckin genocide you? youd think that would prevent educating people? HELLO?

>>509952848 (OP)
Ted re-invented some kind of eco-primitivism, his only "innovative part" was non-politically way of it.
In other words: Ted wasn't in "foundation of eco-_ism", his ideas were raw or semi-baked. And because of it each of them contains inner problems ir were straight up stupid.
Just imagine some folk in 2025 "invented" the concept called "capitalism". In a childish way, without understanding of money mass, income and inflation.

>>509956021
did you read his book?
he met John Money ffs

>>509957302
Charles Epstein

>>509956234
>he also says that humans are nothing more than electrical impulses
>“People are not just electrical impulses or mechanical systems. They have evolved psychological needs that are systematically frustrated by technological society. That is why resistance is not merely tribal—it is a defense of fundamental aspects of human nature.”

>his defense of humanity is purely based in tribalism but he doesn't advocate for any unity he just wants people to attack laboratories
>“It is not enough to react emotionally or instinctively. The movement must be rationally organized, with strategic thinking about how to cripple the system’s capacity to regenerate itself.”

>wants people to have like 20 kids to raise them as soldiers for this crusade
>“A revolution is a struggle carried across generations. Those who reject the techno-industrial system must prepare their children and their children’s children to carry the effort forward.”

>He also mentions things like sublimation and the power process and that humans essentially haven't evolved past tribalism
>“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 autonomy, goal-setting, and effort leading to success.”
thus
>“In modern society, natural human drives are channeled into surrogate activities that do not fulfill the power process. The result is frustration, purposelessness, and social dysfunction.”

>I think Ted's narrative has utterly failed
>“A successful revolutionary movement does not require the support of the majority. It only requires a committed, disciplined minority that understands the system’s danger and refuses to compromise.”

2/3

>>509956234
>most people now would rather have automation rather than immigration, they would let AI run everything if it meant kicking out immigrants
>“The system will do all it can to satisfy human needs superficially. It will provide entertainment, consumer goods, and comfort—not because it cares, but because this keeps people calm and non-disruptive.”

3/3

>>509952848 (OP)
He read the room correctly, aside from thinking he could force a horse to drink.

>>509957820
It doesn't matter which psychopath is at the helm. If the tools to read your mind existed, do you think non-jewish elites would forgo that ability to exert influence?
If we say whites refuse to use it, what about the chinks? what the fuck are you thinking? The tools are the issue here.
All I'm saying is that we stand to solve all problems at once. Focusing exclusively on jews will leave you fucked either way. Letting technological progress fester is not conducive to reducing our total amount of problems. It's basically the only thing creating issues at this point. It's the decisive factor in the unfolding of events in this day since the industrial revolution. Go ahead and focus on the kikes, but understand that it's completely myopic.

>>509957340
The only distinction he made was the technocratic one that you bring up in this very response. That would include things like guns, refrigeration, computers, electricity, and so on. The manifesto itself claims that it's nothing more than a crude outline. If his solution to resisting industrial society was primitivism then should have outlined more than just

>231. Throughout this article we’ve made imprecise statements and statements that ought to have had all sorts of qualifications and reservations attached to them; and some of our statements may be flatly false. Lack of sufficient information and the need for brevity made it impossible for us to formulate our assertions more precisely or add all the necessary qualifications. And of course in a discussion of this kind one must rely heavily on intuitive judgment, and that can sometimes be wrong. So we don’t claim that this article expresses more than a crude approximation to the truth.

Also at one point he claims that children studying math or science ruins them because reading books isn't natural.

> 115. The system HAS TO force people to behave in ways that are increasingly remote from the natural pattern of human behavior. For example, the system needs scientists, mathematicians and engineers. It can’t function without them. So heavy pressure is put on children to excel in these fields. It isn’t natural for an adolescent human being to spend the bulk of his time sitting at a desk absorbed in study. A normal adolescent wants to spend his time in active contact with the real world. Among primitive peoples the things that children are trained to do tend to be in reasonable harmony with natural human impulses. Among the American Indians, for example, boys were trained in active outdoor pursuits—

just the sort of thing that boys like. But in our society children are pushed into studying technical subjects, which most do grudgingly.

>>509954605
His short story "Ship of Fools", is top tier. We need Uncle Ted now, more than ever.

>>509958104
so... there's no source of this information. Someone made it up? Nice

>>509958539
Consider for a moment that technology is advancing incredibly fast now. We've seen more development in the past 100 years then we did in the previous 1000. Maybe humanity just needs time to catch up. If the pace of advancement were to slow down for a while that could be helpful.

>>509958539
technology and brain chips ar etwo different things. you want to throw away the entire thing becaus eof a few specific noxious elements. also you re repeating ted stuff like a drone ry thinking by yourself

and technology can be used to tell sociopathy of even lieing through patterns and neural network actually. it would actually solve evil in governments potentially. you can do good or bad with technology;

people sayign youcant do good and must forget about it, are the evil people who dont want you to compete on their turf. and you should be where they dotn want you to be

>>509956615
They won't listen and I don't have strong enough convictions about it to uproot my families entire life.

>>509958614
>hurr so there's no source durr
yup. there's no source. somebody just made it all up, lil bro.
lol

>>509958566
I need to use my intuition now? Half of this manifesto is attacking 'leftism' and I agree on his criticisms of oversocialization. By far the strongest section of the manifesto was on the masochistic tendencies of protest and how activism has been sublimated as a simple hobby to absorb time away from true revolutionary activity.

>>509958770
Any headway made toward that end could only be temporary. How would you enforce the slowdown anyway? How do you stop the first sub-system from making some technological leap if that leap confers some decisive advantage over all the rest?

>>509957302
>>509958372
Also this guy.

>>509959019
you send china back to the fuckin middle age thats what you do. why would you let soulless chinks who unleash bioweapons the second they can? you delocalize your fuckin factories, you quit selling them food to make them shrink their pop and country , yougive them video games so they have fun that work on very little electricity to make them buy our fuckin batteries and they fuck off. i mean do you know whats CHina? they gneocided and destoryed every people and every culture and china, its like all of europe was just England and everyone wa sgenetically english and believed in their english history

>>509959019
You really can't. Might happen naturally though if AI development hits some unexpected bottleneck. Maybe we can't produce enough electircity to meet increasing demands for 50 years. That just goes back to what I was saying before though. Since we can't stop the advance of technology we have to try our best to steer it in a better direction and we should be going after anyone who uses tech for evil purposes. Tech bros are the worst kind of people to put in charge of society.

>>509955082
>he accomplished nothing but alienating people to his ideas that is just "tech le bad"
>while making high tech bombs to....do nothing I guess.
>“In order to get our message before the public with some chance of making a lasting impression, we had to kill people.”

>>509958848
But there are technologies that create more problems then provide solutions. More so if they become self aware but usually because we fail to realize until it’s too late that’s we never really had total control over them.

>>509954447
>I'm willing to bet if you wrote all your most embarrassing thoughts down throughout all stages of life, everyone would think you're a faggot too
What an interesting and revealing statement.

>>509952848 (OP)
If he was right, the world was not ready for him.
I think it's almost guaranteed that humanity will lose it's technology. Ted's ideas will be relevant when that happens.

>>509959399
>self aware
lol ok bro

>>509952848 (OP)
9/10 theory
3/10 execution
Uncle Ted unfortunately has the same deficiency in charisma that a lot of people on /pol/ do: What they are saying is true and correct but they cannot for the life of them make anybody want to listen. They are the perfect song sung out of key.

human activity is not a protected class by nature. Humans arent required to have greater value than technology. That thinking is besides fallacious, ironically unnatural.

>>509957159
>a retard can tot... totally mind control a genius bro...
kek

>>509959575
what a non-argument still. you see how this works?

>>509959266
>>509958848
I don't think you're following due to some ESL issues.

>>509959608
2/10 theory
0/10 execution
come later

>>509959968
i understand tyou, you are the one that doesnt understand me. if you cant go past a few obvious typos, how could you even understand this discourse. hate morons like you, go sex change if you care so much about writing. so unbelievably obnoxious

>>509959873
>b-but they're retards though
that's not a much better excuse for simping for a glownigger terrorist than "he reviewed himself and determined that the brainwashing wasn't even that bad".
do a little better over there, tryhard bro.

>>509957176
>source: a retard
Lmao
you know we've actually read Ted's stuff and read the reasons he clearly stated former his opinions and subsequent actions right? and it was multiple issues involving the destruction of the natural habitat particularly a natural spring he went to for years that made him take action not some midwit glownigger mind control plan

>>509958566
>The only distinction he made was the technocratic one that you bring up in this very response. That would include things like guns, refrigeration, computers, electricity, and so on
>> “Small-scale technology is not necessarily harmful. Men can hunt with bows and arrows, plow with horses, make garments by hand, build houses of logs, etc. Such technology does not require or imply any large-scale social organization. On the other hand, technology that requires large-scale organization will end up creating a system that compels people to subordinate themselves to it.”

>The manifesto itself claims that it's nothing more than a crude outline
true
> “Some details have been simplified or left out. Our discussion is intended to be suggestive rather than conclusive.”
> “Revolutionaries must not imagine that they can plan the future in advance down to the smallest detail. Much will have to be improvised as events unfold.”

>If his solution to resisting industrial society was primitivism then should have outlined more
see above

>>509952848 (OP)
Ted was right about almost everything.
Except one thing

>he didn't have a real answer on how to deal with the problem
just because you can make incredibly reasonable logical guesses, doesn't mean you have what it takes to lead people to the solution.
Because bombing random people with incredibly shitty bombs isn't really a solution.

>>509957324
Lmao literally nothing in there relating to your retarded statement

>>509960138
wow you clearly read his stuff thats crazy

now how could you possibly have any idea about the extent of glow psyops? you work there? all i know is psyopping tards to blow shit up is their bread and butter, and that he literally is part of a gov psyop officially, and that he didnt blame the jews depsite being supposedly so smart. so maybe he wasnt mcd but maybe he was, not like tis important anyway

>>509960090
you write like an unfocused blithering retard. Work on that and maybe I'll take you seriously.

>>509960264
Ted's bombings have little/nothing to do with his thesis, they were essentially a means to get the journaliggers to publish his manifesto

>>509959594

>>509960404
bingo

>>509960403
like i care about convincing some random idiot. i dont need to focus to own this entire website, or world even. you r enot worth my focus

>>509957802
>people should have kids
retard filter: you should have 20 kids and attack and train them as a personal army to attack laboratories
See the difference?

>>509952956
>society can drive someone crazy
No way.

>>509960404
>>509960498
He didn't value human life. Probably his biggest flaw and it definetly influenced his writings in a negative way.

>>509959900
Nope. My comment still holds.

>>509960784
which points were negatively influenced?

>>509960784
he did, it's one of the driving messages of his writings, he wasn't like Petti Linkola i.e more on the ecologist side

>>509960787
ok assume ted and anyone that even read the first 14 words of his manifesto are secretly trannies. now what?

>>509960404
and his manifesto states nothing on how to fix the solution.
So once again Anon, read my post.

Ted was brilliant at expressing the extents of how the system creates upon the system to enlsave you into the system, to build back upon the system.
I've read his manifesto dozens of times and once wrote a speech on it for college.

The manifesto and Ted himself clearly have no solutions other than "get rid of system".
Yeah no shit.

>80% of all money spent is spent by a woman
>illegals getting into our country to vote for more illegals
>white birth rate decline
>money laundering to India and other countries
Bit late don't you think?
We no longer hold the means to dislodge from the system, I've already cut all spending down to bare necessity and investment.
My wife does not use social media or buy into "trend items".

I'm one fucking dude, you people are really going to need to step it the fuck up because if you say some faggot shit like "kill all X" well what is stopping you?
You go do it, stop expecting everyone to do the work for you.

>>509952848 (OP)
I could say he was wrong on a few issues, but he is mostly right, poor Ted, they really did him so dirty, god damnit burn in hell JewSA.

>>509960643
then why argue when you didn't even read Ted or anything that is remotely close to this subject, let me guess you're a nigger or nafri?

>>509960784
>He didn't value human life.
“If you value human dignity, autonomy, and freedom, then you must also recognize that these cannot survive indefinitely under technological development.”
“It is because we care about humanity that we are forced to take a stand against the system.”
“The purpose of my actions was to call attention to the disaster that technological progress is inflicting on the human race. My motivation was not hatred but desperation.”
etc.

>>509961015
read Technological Slavery
you don't come off as knowledgeable on Ted if you state the usual meme that muh bombs = solution, as if he were that naive, the bombs were a little step to put the word out in public, and in many ways they did a lot, probably most writers on the philosophy of technology and related topics indirectly owe Ted for the publicity

>>509961084
i know enough to know thta hes an idiot who attracts a lot of other idiots as usual. ressusitate this russian caveman so i BTFO him in debate with the strength of the sun

>>509960966
>ted
>the first 14 words
he wasn't reading siege like you tryhard niggers do, lil bro.

>>509960966
See my original response. You'll get it eventually. Or maybe not.

>>509958539
Just be aware of two things:
1. You are not worthy to clean Uncle Ted's spit bucket.
2. You are revealing your judaism.

>>509961015
If you could read you'd realize most of your statements were already refuted in this thread

>>509952848 (OP)
>convince me that uncle Ted was not right.
i don't want to, because he was.

>>509960242
If you believe this to be his solution than every midwit that reduces him to 'tech bad' is correct. Part of the reason colonists were completely fine with handing out guns to local populations because they were confident that they would never be able to refine the smaller parts and maintain technocratic influence over the smaller parts like screws. From what I understand

>>509957802
Now do this one. There's no wait you didn't see it.
>>509960265

>>509961790
ted worshippers. hes literally your jesus christ substitute. when you r enot chrsitian, women become vegan feminazis and men worsghip ted and wank to loli. SAD!

>>509961427
i don't know what you're talking about

>>509961790
I'm not jewish.
I don't want to clean spit buckets

>>509962209
>Now do this one. There's no wait you didn't see it.
what do you mean "do this one"? what is unclear from the quotes?

>>509962635
you were trying to lump the glownigger terrorist in with edgy white nationalism in your previous post.
and i pointed out how retarded that is.
that's it, lil bro.

>>509962856
Nah. I just understand the board culture and there's literally 14 words in the first sentence of ISAIF. Ted is not a glownigger

>>509954605
I think it's the best part of the book. The fact that he understood it 30 years before the general public is a testament to his pattern recognition.

>>509962779
That was directed at the other guy not you. He was upset over me saying that Ted advocated for revolutionaries to start producing children then raise them up for the cause which he explicitly states is destroying industrial society.

>>509963324
he rescinded that statement to make children in a later edition

I think the crux of his problem with modern society is that it's too complex. This complexity makes people neurotic because they can't grasp it. Basically, you feel powerless. This can't be fixed simply by turning off the internet. After all, the reason why you know that it's so complex in the very beginning is because you watch the news or get them indirectly through social media. If you live a simple life. If all you do is go to work, come home, eat, and sleep, you wouldn't be bothered by how complex society is because you wouldn't even be aware of it. I believe this is the case because my grandma recently said that the concept of stress was very novel. During her time, it didn't exist. Things moved slower, because there was less to do. People knew less of the world. People knew of less things to do. If all you have is 1 video game, then you can take your time playing it. But if your given 1000 games, you've won't have any idea where to start. It's called the paradox of choice.

The truth does not set you free.

Also, there is no way anyone would ever want to abandon things like AC or anything you can find in a kitchen.

>>509963721
>Also, there is no way anyone would ever want to abandon things like AC or anything you can find in a
kitchen
"Suppose you had a revolution against technology. Either you destroy the whole technological system and return to a simpler way of life, or you end up eventually reconstituting the same system you tried to escape. You can’t have a lasting compromise where you get rid of only the bad parts of technology and keep only the good parts, because the good parts inevitably serve as the foundation for the bad parts to re-emerge."

>>509954062
>That organization inherently requires tight control over human behavior.
This is so fucking retarded it's not even funny. First of all, for humans to coexists, even in a non-technological society, there must be of organization that inherently requires tight control over human behaviour. For example, laws. Is Ted in favour of no laws, legal and social? Would that finally achieve true human freedom?

The problem is that he's thinking in extremes, which makes it hard to take him seriously. If you want to argue that there is too much bureaucracy and that the state has too much power over the individual, that's fine, but that doesn't mean technology has to be completely abandoned. There is a thing called "temperament." It was discussed like 2000 years ago by the greeks.

>>509964191
>white or black thinking
>you either goon or 24 hours a day or you never jerk off or masturbate in all your life
Do you see the problem with his logic? Restrictions work if enough people are aware of what the lack of restriction does. That's why regulations exist.

>>509964191
Also, point stands: no one would ever agree to those terms.

>You can’t have a lasting compromise where you get rid of only the bad parts of technology and keep only the good parts
You can. He's simply too stubborn/autistic to consider it.

Uncle ted was right.

In other news the middle ages peasantry was kept uneducated and illiterate by a hierarchical aristocracy. Any peasant that got woke and started, I don't know, shooting couriers with a homemade crossbow would be rapidly hunted down, even if it took decades, and his peasant brother would be more than willing to cooperate with authorities since as a peasant it isn't his place to stand up to them. But then the "radical" peasant could say from the gallows "I WAS RIGHT!! WE ARE BEING OPPRESSED!!! AAHHHHHHH!!!" And everyone would nod and say that he was very correct in his analysis.

>>509963721
people are stressed because they don't grasp stuff precisely because they don't know enough. if education taught the basic of every important elment of society gradually without stressing people in an efficient way in school, every single person would have a decent understanding, and further it some more during casual conversations. half truths are worse than ignorance, which is worse than full truth,; but half truth is necessary step to get to full truth. anyway, jews

>>509964800
lords are fucking pieces of shit, see "grande jacquerie". you re a fucking cuck wanting to slave for sociopaths. ther eis nothing wrong with young ignorant idealists, its called life. whats wrong is the state never growing them out of it and in fact making them like that on purpose. ther ewas no woke back then. no fagottry, no trannies, no suicidal ideologies pushed by jews and htis had nothing to do with feudalism

>>509964565
>First of all, for humans to coexists, even in a non-technological society, there must be of organization that inherently requires tight control over human behaviour. For example, laws. Is Ted in favour of no laws, legal and social? Would that finally achieve true human freedom?
“In primitive societies, physical security and other benefits depended on cooperation and conformity within the small group. But these conditions did not require a totalitarian bureaucracy or a vast apparatus of surveillance and enforcement. The natural environment imposed its own constraints, but it did not subject people to the constant psychological pressures created by modern systems of organization.”
“Freedom means having control over the circumstances of one’s own life. A society in which individuals are subject to regulations, commands, and pressures that come from large, impersonal organizations is not a free society.”
“Modern man is strapped down by a network of rules and regulations, and his fate depends on the actions of persons remote from him whose decisions he cannot influence. This is not accidental or a result of the arbitrariness of arrogant bureaucrats. It is necessary and inevitable in any technologically advanced society.”

>The problem is that he's thinking in extremes, which makes it hard to take him seriously. If you want to argue that there is too much bureaucracy and that the state has too much power over the individual, that's fine, but that doesn't mean technology has to be completely abandoned. There is a thing called "temperament." It was discussed like 2000 years ago by the greeks.
“No doubt some people will claim that my views are ‘extreme.’ But I ask them to look at the history of technological development over the last 200 years and explain what would prevent the same trends from continuing. If you can’t show what forces would halt or reverse the process, then you are simply expressing a wish, not an argument.”

>>509965023
The real problem is people sending their kids off to the state to be educated. There are two major problems with this one is the idea that the government can be entrusted to raise your children. The second idea is that the vast majority of the population needs a liberal middle class education and to go to college. This would imply a society where the vast majority of people are middle class white collar workers. I believe this came from some sense of greed where everyone wanted the privileged lifestyle of the upper middle class when in fact no economy can survive without the majority of people being lower class and the way to become lower class is to have kids engage in child labor not go to school and study

>>509964896
The problem isn't strictly education. The problem has more so to do with that there is too much to do without any real answer. For example, what did people expect you to do 100 years ago? Get a job, get married, have kids. Easy enough. That's all you needed to know in life. You had a good understanding of the world that gave you both meaning and a sense of direction in the world. There was nothing more about the world that you needed to know than this. Today, you're basically expected to care about everything that happens in the news since you are expected to stay informed because democracy good okay. What this means is that people will inevitably discover a fact about the world that they can't change that they think is very bad. For leftists, that would be global warming. For anons here on /pol/, it would be white replacement. You can't do anything about these. You can't stop them. Yet, you know of them.

I get that this post is pretty scatterbrained, but I think the core of my point is that things have become way less immediate and instead more surreal. We know and are expected to care about the politics of countries other than our own, for example. Back in the day, you're only problems in life would have been things like what to do for a living and such, not international politics.

>>509964796
“It is not possible to make a lasting compromise between technology and freedom, because technology is by far the more powerful social force and continually encroaches on freedom through repeated compromises.”
>“Suppose you had a revolution against technology. Either you destroy the whole technological system and return to a simpler way of life, or you end up eventually reconstituting the same system you tried to escape. You can’t have a lasting compromise where you get rid of only the bad parts of technology and keep only the good parts, because the good parts inevitably serve as the foundation for the bad parts to re-emerge.
“It is true that one can have some individual freedom in industrial society, but only at the cost of abandoning collective power. It is only individuals and small groups that can afford to go against the system. A large organization cannot afford to, because it must be large and therefore it must conform to the system’s requirements.”
>“Modern man is strapped down by a network of rules and regulations, and his fate depends on the actions of persons remote from him whose decisions he cannot influence. This is not accidental or a result of the arbitrariness of arrogant bureaucrats. It is necessary and inevitable in any technologically advanced society.”

>>509965460
No. That's all that I need to reply with, because you are retarded. My posts remain unrefuted.

Everything he states is too vague. He makes no concrete argument, and every counter-argument he makes is simply him saying "um, no, that's not going to work, because I said so."

Don't reply to me.

>>509965530
And it's been a long time since I read Ted, but I think this touches on something he talked about which is the overwhelming leftism produced in society by mass education. Because children are sent off to government school which gives them all a liberal arts education, modern westerners ("leftists") are more literate than ever, but less skilled than ever at things like farming, building, crafting, or fighting. We have a giant mass of people that have been trained. How to read in a liberal arts education environment but have lost the generational skills of their ancestors. Hence, they are much more likely to spend their days scrolling through social media then, for example planting crops.

>>509954685
Any of the smart natives who actually escaped the substance abuse and got an education all went COMMIE.

I shit you not.

>>509965773
>I won't work because I said so sweetie :)
The fact that you take this retard seriously is scary.

>>509963069
>there's 14 words in the first sentence of ISAIF
what the fuck are you talking about, lil bro?
this sounds like some "take your meds" type of mental gymnastics. but i'll hear you out.
describe what the fuck you are typing on about.

>>509965530
yes thats the deal with supressing tyranny and evil, and enlightement and democracy, people have to be informed to know what is true or desirable. Ye speople didnt do that, because knowledge was supressed by jews and tyrannical states and capitalistic tycoons. Yet it is what they should have done ceaselessly, since 1789 in fact. Its a lot to learn wbut when you do so gradually ove ryears in school its much more palatable. Kings thought the people couldnt do shit about democracy until they got their heads cutoff, and nobles thought they were hot shit until the jacqueries burned them lik chicken on campfires. I gues you re one of these atheistic rational people or some gov shills demoralizing. You don't know as much as you think you do and certainly with your loser atitttude and your certainty nothing will change withyou. I gues sits more because you dotn want to, due to your atheism induced selfishness.

Also people mains mission is to make sure they arnt ruled by a tyranny of retardeds sociopaths. For the rest, they dont need to know every little bit about foreign countries

>>509952848 (OP)
You have not read him and therefore are retarded.

>>509965497
everyone goes to school , not uni. if ppl were smarter aor and whiter and teachign was efficient you could teach more stuff faster and harder, no need to wait for uni, cut the fat off useless bullshit in high school and middle school and thats it

Our only hope is that as we ascend tiers of progress, the distance to each next tier grows exponentially, eventually being too great a span to cross, and we sputter out and die off.
Because the alternative is basically unending growth which results in a whole lotta suffering.

>>509953625
We're not running out and oil doesn't come from fossils.

>>509958360
It was obvious that he was getting brainwashed by the CIA or something.
But they fucked up and Ted went nuclear shortly after.

>>509956021
they are actually scared.
the horrors of modern times are beyond the little Timmy field agents.

>>509966137
can you count, nigger

>>509952848 (OP)
The only thing is you can't stop technology havers from making longpig out of you.

He was an associal incel since the beginning , he killed innocent people because he can't find girl and friends

>>509952848 (OP)

He was right, as nobody should get nukes, nowdays nobody should be able to use AI

>>509952956
Meme flag to hide your Jewish identity
The fact is that he was groomed by his Jewish psychiatrist into becoming trans and he killed him for it

>>509953625
It's not "Fossil fuels" you fucking toddler
Oil is naturally occurring, it's the second most abundant resource on earth after water, and just like water it renews itself, it never runs out ever.
Stop falling for Jewish tricks

>>509952956
>society is unnatural and destroys all who live in it down to their very soul
>
>you thought you were a woman lol

>>509952848 (OP)
Once a technology exists you either use it or its used against you.

>>509952848 (OP)
It's part of human nature to want to develop technology. Even homo erectus used tools, and developed ways to improve them. Even if we were to do everything he said, go back to a more primitive state of society, within a few generations people would forget why those changes were made and immediately start developing technology again. Humans are pathologically dissatisfied and will always look for ways to "improve" their lives. We'd inevitably end up back where we are. He's not so much rebelling against technology (which is neither good nor evil) but against human nature and the way it interacts with technology. The development of agriculture led to diabetes, heart disease, vitamin deficiencies, stunted growth, etc, but we did it anyways because it was easier than hunting and gathering. It's the same story.

>>509967986
precisely why the board needs to be flipped. There's no reform of the technoindustrial system that can restore human dignity.

>>509952848 (OP)
I read his work and wrote letters while he was alive, he responded to each one with more detail to every question I had. He was sincere and kind, in the end I understood why he became Uncle Ted to me and so many many others. There will never be another Uncle Ted. RIP, I miss him every day.

>>509968105
first off the process to get to where we are today didn't happen overnight. Sure, you can argue that post-collapse humans will once again seek to industrialize, but this will be an unconscious process, and it will be strained by the fact that all the resources that kicked off the first industrial revolution require an immense technical capability to obtain because the easily accessible sites have been tapped dry. In short, the revolution is necessary to restore human dignity but there is no provision we could possibly put in place to prevent technological progress

>>509968457
YOUR DADDY TOOK YOUR SPIRITUAL VIRGINITY AND YOURE NOW ADDICTED HOW CUTE IN ANCIENT GREECE YOU COULD HAVE WONDERFUL GAY SEX EVERY DAY