Evil, but a fascinating person. Not read his manifesto but appearently it straddles the line between genius and utterly mad from what people say (like he did I suppose)
Kaczynski has many points that are perhaps academically worth discussing, but the guy was–whether he’d agree with the parlance or not–clearly a weird conservative whose views almost entirely inform groups that should not be taken seriously or given political power.[^1] i don’t think i’ve ever met someone who had what i’d describe as “good politics” who takes the manifesto to heart. both anecdotally and as far as i can research, the manifesto is most actively applied in the political space by accelerationist terrorists on the far-right, nihilists across the political spectrum who have given up on anything better, and anarcho-primitivist movements whose ideology is essentially predicated on widespread mass death. make of that what you will.
[^1] the manifesto almost immediately opens up with what i can best describe as 1980s-era rant about how gay and cucked and unserious the left and people pushing for civil rights are. he’s certainly not an ally of liberals or leftists.
once upon a time i fell down a rabbit hole that led me to a criticism of Kaczynski, and in it a collection of things he had criticised about the left. it was weirdly long. that is to say, your post scriptum there made me chuckle; such a funny way to put it.
yeah i always have to question people who self-describe as left who take him seriously at all because it’s like… you know he hates people like you, right? he does not hide how he feels, lol
There’s also this passage:
“It is true that not all was sweet-
ness and light in primitive societies… transexuality
was fairly common”
I could maybe ignore his blatant bigotry if there was anything meritous about his manifesto, but he says nothing that hadn’t already been said more competently by philosophers before him, and that hasn’t since been more effectively communicated than in the movie Fight Club.
Kaczynski has many points that are perhaps academically worth discussing, but the guy was–whether he’d agree with the parlance or not–clearly a weird conservative whose views almost entirely inform groups that should not be taken seriously or given political power.[^1] i don’t think i’ve ever met someone who had what i’d describe as “good politics” who takes the manifesto to heart. both anecdotally and as far as i can research, the manifesto is most actively applied in the political space by accelerationist terrorists on the far-right, nihilists across the political spectrum who have given up on anything better, and anarcho-primitivist movements whose ideology is essentially predicated on widespread mass death. make of that what you will.
[^1] the manifesto almost immediately opens up with what i can best describe as 1980s-era rant about how gay and cucked and unserious the left and people pushing for civil rights are. he’s certainly not an ally of liberals or leftists.
once upon a time i fell down a rabbit hole that led me to a criticism of Kaczynski, and in it a collection of things he had criticised about the left. it was weirdly long. that is to say, your post scriptum there made me chuckle; such a funny way to put it.
yeah i always have to question people who self-describe as left who take him seriously at all because it’s like… you know he hates people like you, right? he does not hide how he feels, lol
There’s also this passage: “It is true that not all was sweet- ness and light in primitive societies… transexuality was fairly common”
I could maybe ignore his blatant bigotry if there was anything meritous about his manifesto, but he says nothing that hadn’t already been said more competently by philosophers before him, and that hasn’t since been more effectively communicated than in the movie Fight Club.
Speaking of which, can anyone recommend me good critiques (books or articles) of Kaczynski’s ideas?