View Full Version : The Una-Bombers Manifesto
Ultra-Violence
2nd November 2006, 02:04
my freind had it and let me borrow it but i read very interesting and i want a copy but she got hers frome crimethinc so does any one know were i can get it for free!
which doctor
2nd November 2006, 04:50
http://xahlee.org/p/um/um.html
it's very long, very boring, and very dry
Delirium
2nd November 2006, 05:16
I like ship of fools, an entertaining short story.
shadowed by the secret police
2nd November 2006, 16:35
Unabomber was an anarcho-primitivist not an anarcho-syndicalist. Dr. Noam Chomsky was on his target list and had all his mail carefully monitored. Anarcho-primitivists want to destroy industrial society and go back to nature which is really chaotic if you think about it. People tend to confuse anarcho-primitivists with anarcho-syndicalists.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Industrial_S..._and_Its_Future (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Industrial_Society_and_Its_Future)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-primitivist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalist
Ultra-Violence
3rd November 2006, 03:27
i know what he was but i liked his crituiqe of the left very inersting in my opinion
What happend to him is he on death row or sitting in jail?
which doctor
3rd November 2006, 03:42
Originally posted by Ultra-
[email protected] 02, 2006 10:27 pm
i know what he was but i liked his crituiqe of the left very inersting in my opinion
What happend to him is he on death row or sitting in jail?
He's serving a life sentence at a maximum security prison.
Zero
3rd November 2006, 05:32
I hope a large man handles his buttocks like a cowboy.
(prison joke, not a gay joke. Don't jump down my throat.)
apathy maybe
3rd November 2006, 06:16
Why? He is being punished by simply being in gaol. Not only that, he actually only ever really sees guards. That is what maximum security means.
The joke is not funny at all, you seem to be advocating rape, which is never cool.
subcal
4th November 2006, 01:43
I found it interesting to see his downfall was claiming actions, if he had of never written anything he may still be at large.
He was shorlisted however because of his known affiliations, very interesting stuff..
not to mention the bungle with the Exxon....
Vargha Poralli
4th November 2006, 16:27
This article is written by SUN cofounder and its chief scientist Bill joy. it makes numerous references to unabomber manifesto and adds a nice continuations to it
Why Future Doesn't need us - Bill Joy (http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy.html)
chimx
4th November 2006, 19:14
ted kaczynski, aka the unabomber, was not an anarcho primitivist. anarcho primitivists just latch onto his writing, probably due to his popularity.
he used to hang out in a book store near where i live. my friend knew him when she was a kid. she would call him 'uncle teddy'. weird.
Qwerty Dvorak
5th November 2006, 17:02
ted kaczynski, aka the unabomber, was not an anarcho primitivist. anarcho primitivists just latch onto his writing, probably due to his popularity.
Then what was he?
chimx
5th November 2006, 17:52
some guy living in the woods near lincoln mt that was disgruntled with technological development and ecological destruction.. maybe he had primitivist tendency's, but just cause you are a primitivist doesn't make you an anarcho-primitivist.
DocBenway
7th November 2006, 14:39
He was an anarcho primativist.
Here is a caption from Wikipedia,
"Industrial Society and Its Future begins with Kaczynski's assertion that the "Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race."[1] In his opening and closing chapters, Kaczynski condemns "leftism" and "leftists" as "anti-individualistic" and "pro-collectivist", "because, deep inside, [the leftist] feels like a loser."[2] The "leftism" described in the document is contrasted with "non-leftism", and is diametrically opposed to what the document envisions as "anarchy": "power... on an individual or small-group basis."[3] His "anarchy" would leave people "able to control the circumstances of their own lives", the anarchist opposed to technology "because it makes small groups dependent on large organizations."
Well, he wasn't a rightist. And he was against Leftists...and who are the only people against leftists who aren't rightists???
Anarcho Primativists, thats who!
It is those Anarcho Primativists who came up with their befuddled and nonsense term Post Left Anarchism, such as they constantly jabber on about in Anarchy: A Journal of Desire Armed.
Do you see where he writes his anarchy would leave people "able to control the circumstances of their own lives." ANARCHIST.
Do you see where it ways that anarchists oppose technology "because it amkes small groups dependent on large organizations." ANARCHO PRIMATIVIST.
HE WAS AN ANARCHO PRIMATIVIST. One of those damn fools living in a fantasy world who are best either ignored, labeled as right wingers, or read for fun because their so wacked out (thats what I do).
chimx
7th November 2006, 18:31
so anyone who is against both the left and the right is an anarcho-primitivist?
he never claimed to be an anarchist. folks at A:AJODA cling to his writing due to his popularity.
post left anarchism was not coined by primitivists, and is NOT synonymous with it. it has more to do with an abandonment of a class-centric analysis of power structures. personally i find it has a lot of merit.
DocBenway
8th November 2006, 02:22
Originally posted by
[email protected] 07, 2006 06:31 pm
post left anarchism was not coined by primitivists, and is NOT synonymous with it. it has more to do with an abandonment of a class-centric analysis of power structures. personally i find it has a lot of merit.
If it has any merit, I would like to hear a commonsensicle definition of it. Can you explain, right here right now, Post Left Anarchism in such a way that makes any damn sense?
chimx
8th November 2006, 02:58
post left anarchism is the assertion that it is no longer practical to align oneself with the traditional Left, feeling that the traditional Left is anachronistic. That is, the Left continues to grip the ideology and praxis of a bygone era (ie. Marxism, Bolshevism, Maoism and other political "dead" movements).
They feel that the class-centric analysis of the Left is a product of its own anachronisticity (i may have made that word up). Instead they advocate the abandonment of single issue causes for a synthetic of revolutionary anarchistic sentiment.
Many people try to counter that this means they are anti-worker. rather they try to work outside the scope of labor liberation for a broader individual liberation, which itself encompasses labor liberation.
I say it has merit cause I'm sick of workerism.
Red October
8th November 2006, 03:47
the unabomber was fucked in the head. whether you like his writings or not, you should realize its coming from a seriously disturbed individual who bombed and killed people because he didnt like technology. have you read his psych evluation? i read some excerpts from it a while ago. very interesting stuff.
which doctor
8th November 2006, 03:50
Originally posted by Red October
[email protected] 07, 2006 10:47 pm
the unabomber was fucked in the head. whether you like his writings or not, you should realize its coming from a seriously disturbed individual who bombed and killed people because he didnt like technology. have you read his psych evluation? i read some excerpts from it a while ago. very interesting stuff.
One of the key differences between a crazy person and a sane person is that the crazy person acts on their impulses while the sane person holds them back. We all have crazy impulses, but few of us ever act on them.
Insane shouldn't be used to describe Ted's thoughts, it should be used to describe his actions.
Janus
8th November 2006, 05:31
The Unabomber definitely had some sort of psychological problems but he deviates from the normal model in that he was quite a gifted person with exceptional math abilities.
Red October
8th November 2006, 22:21
One of the key differences between a crazy person and a sane person is that the crazy person acts on their impulses while the sane person holds them back. We all have crazy impulses, but few of us ever act on them.
Insane shouldn't be used to describe Ted's thoughts, it should be used to describe his actions.
i dont think thats the only difference between him and a normal, sane human being. he had a bunch of psychological problems that led him to do what he did. you can tell from his writings how fuckedi n the head he was. lots of people who are very gifted also have serious psychological issues to go along with that.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2020 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.