>Elder god tier: Villain's motives are hard to find fault in and arguably better than the hero's
 |
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
|
>Elder god tier: Villain's motives are hard to find fault in and arguably better than the hero's
>Elder god tier: Villain's motives are hard to find fault in and arguably better than the hero's
|
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
|
bro lets all go back to living like cave men yeah that will def. happen
Human weren’t evolved to live in industrial society, chud
then what are you doing here?
then why can't we change to do so?
Because Industrialism only centers around humans where they treat rest of the nature and animal kingdom as consumer goods. You're taking elements from nature, creating an artificial system of your own while destroying the planet. This a self destructive system and it will all come crumbling down after it reaches it’s breaking point and you know it.
Because you don't understand anything about evolution or natural selection despite being a godless atheist that'd kill your own offspring because a israelite told you to.
source?
But we literally evolved to form an industrial society. It is not like some alien life form implanted the idea of industrial society in the minds of 19th century people.
industrial society is not a work of intelligent design
>bro let's just become deviant apes, stray away from our natural evolutionary path, shit out billions of copies of us and destroy nature altogether to sustain the ever increasing population
None of what we're doing is natural. Look at the rest of the animal kingdom. They don't multiply on an unnatural scale and impact the climate enough to cause irreversible catastrophe. They live how nature intended them to, they multiply and keep their number steady on par with the natural ecosystem and food chain, they take from nature and they return back but there is balance in it which is extremely necessary to sustain the system. Humans are destroying that balance
this is not true, have you ever seen a fox breaking into a chicken den? they go ballistic and kill dozens of them without eating more than one or two.
animals dont have an intrinsic knowledge of the balance of nature they are subservient to, they eat and reproduce as much as they can. its just that nature forces constraints on them and they just die when they run out of resources. this makes it look like theres a balance over long periods of time when in fact it's upward and downward spirals.
there also have been animals that changed the face of the world forever without even being conscious, for example photosynthesis bacteria that even brought oxygen into the atmosphere in the first place, where was the "balance of nature" then? when all non-oxygen tolerant life went extinct?
neither are cats, pigeons, rats or rabbits. but they're all doing fine aren't they
Hey and let's kill some random small-time innocents to get it done. Tedsimps are moronic
Saved and pic related. But unabros are too moronic to see the light about their moron (troony) freak
why did you attach a self portrait to your post?
>bro lets all start living like machines, consuming motor(seed) oil in food, being chipped and tracked and traced everywhere, yeah that will def. happen
industrial society is a mistake.
no need for such extreme
the message I grab from the whole thing is "watch out for technology, be mindful of it at all times or it will ruin you and society"
which is 100% valid
Based. I’ve recently got back into fly fishing and some other hobbies and life is 1000x better.
He was a wizard, that's why you think he was a good guy despite him committing murder, because he used chaos magic he learnt from mathematics
While you are correct about him using the chaos magic and being a wizard, that is precisely why I like him, not the murders
Was his ulterior plan to use the soul energies and his fame magick for magical rituals?
No. Just because he was misguided on his path does not mean that his destination was not true
The movie was pure shit until the scene where he hallucinates the train then becomes 11/10 kino until the end.
Idk bro wasn't that good
I drank 84 oz of steel reserve at that point btw
Personally I really liked it.
>The movie
?
Only midwits worship this guy.
midwits cry about him murdering people
I'm a midwit, I hate him
Midwits simply cannot conceive of a world without their precious toys.
What are you doing on a website so?
>i am very smart
Based lol
You’d kys the second you had to think without pulling out your folder of old memes
You must be at least 18 to post here.
Pulling out another meme. You’d be sucking wiener begging for sheckles.
That would be the other Ted who women would do anything for.
>is that…HECKIN WORK?? AHH IM GOING INSANE
Uncle Ted actually advocated for people to do meaningful work, smooth-brain.
I dont know what kind of work that pic is about but I know that what I do is meaningful and I don’t complain about it because that would just make the day twice as long
the sign is cringe but working isn’t, I get what he’s trying to say
Worshipping wagecucking poetically is nightmare panopticon brainwashing shit. Frick whatever homosexual wrote that sign.
>things we love
>only talks about work
>"second family"
The propaganda is insidious and subtle
>For a period of several weeks in 1966, Kaczynski experienced intense sexual fantasies of being a female and decided to undergo gender transition. He arranged to meet with a psychiatrist, but changed his mind in the waiting room and did not disclose his reason for making the appointment.
>Afterwards, enraged, he considered killing the psychiatrist and other people whom he hated. Kaczynski described this episode as a "major turning point" in his life:[36][37][38]
>"I felt disgusted about what my uncontrolled sexual cravings had almost led me to do. And I felt humiliated, and I violently hated the psychiatrist. Just then there came a major turning point in my life. Like a Phoenix, I burst from the ashes of my despair to a glorious new hope."[37]
Lol, why are chuds so repressed?
You're either trannies or no-life homosexual trolls, but either way you're going to have a nice day, so hurry up already.
>almost gets trooned
>realizes that the medical industrial complex is but one of the many facets of the system destroying humanities essence
>realizes the 'food' industry is designed to make sick people to prop up the 'med' industry
>realizes most of the doctors are literally selected for being morons that follow procedures designed to kill without ever having an actual thought on the matter through 8+ years of med 'school.'
>realizes the system is literally designed around mass murder, secret and otherwise....
uncle ted knew better than to chop his bits off, good for him
Nice redemption arc
trannies are all maniacs
I don't know why troons try to prove that he is "one of them", he literally states in the quote that it was just gross sexual fetishism and if he were any weaker, he probably would have ruined his life because of it
>he probably would have ruined his life because of it
lol yeah look at his life
I'd rather be in prison for the rest of my life than be free and living with a mutilated body
He may be in prison, but atleast he looks content with the choices that he made. If he would have trooned out, he would have realized how disgusting it was a few years into it and killed himself
It's the male desire to conquer and make things their own
>protagonist rejects evil right before it would lead to his eternal damnation and begins his journey towards salvation instead
is there a more based trope in the history of television & film?
So this is what happen to trans people who are not as intelligent as Ted?
>deranged mentally ill crazy dude
>wanted to be a transhomosexual
like clockwork
chuds and troons are really two faces of the same coin.
Also LMAO, he didn't even talk with the psych and got mad at him for his own problems.
Nowadays he would post on /misc/ among all the brown people over there.
It looks like ADX has mellowed him out.
his letters and books from prison are interesting to read
when writing about what a revolution would be like he's very careful with his wording and straight up says that there's stuff he cannot talk about directly or it will be taken as incitement of terrorism and they'll block his letters out
Information society and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
Anyone here has even read Teddy?
His writings are very interesting, all the negative aspects of modern western culture he describes are a direct consequences of the industrial revolution, he has a very deep understanding of why western societies will all fail.
I don't agree with the murders, though, but the guy was genuinely spot on regarding his analysis.
if you concede that his analysis was accurate you are forced to concede that violence is the only potential solution
his targets and methodology were primitive lol but it's not an easy thing to network around and Ted wasn't a very sociable guy to begin with
his other writings go into pretty extended detail as to why attempting to reform the problems away is untenable
simply put, your distaste for his violence can be seen as an internalization of the System, which must monopolize violence in order to function correctly
Ain't this dude gonna die soon
i heard he was moved to the prison medical facility cause of some tumour
he's probably gonna die soon 🙁 if i know him he's probably gonna refuse much of modern medicine and surgery
>have an obviously brilliant mind
>want to change the world for the better
>write about the flaws of modern society and its causes
>pursue absolutely no career in politics or try to bring your views to the light
>....
>just send bombs to completely inconsequential and irrelevant people
He was smart, but also unfathomably moronic
if he went into politics he would be a member of a fringe extremist party in bumfrick nowhere and nobody outside his county would know about his views. by killing people at least he immortalised himself on the internet
Not supporting of what he did, but bombs unironically have had a much bigger impact on major societal issues than politics.
Pretty much all that we've got we've got with blood.
...And that's how leftists and israelites were able to infiltrate and subvert so many establishments. Let this be a lesson for you kids.
>go into politics without lots of filthy money from the outside
>think you are going to achieve a coup or something
Leftists got funded with dirty commie money from countries like Russia and China. They didn’t just march in and take over by their wits and strategy you dumbfrick
>yeah bro just tell them to stop haha that'll do the trick
No, you just kill them. A simple trick that modern cattle humans have forgotten. The tree of liberty will be watered.
>we just don’t knoooooww
Fricking moron, there is proof we do FRICKING KNOW.
>no
You’re vaxxed to the nines, I already know. It was a rhetorical question. You can’t claim that the system can’t be stopped and also be unvaxxed
if it wasn't obvious already, my stance is that you're a pussy who wants to eat his cake and have it, too
my stance is that compromise (what you want) is pointless and that full commitment is the most logical path to success over the longest term
for reference, I made these posts
&
>stop those by death doing what shouldn’t be done
>compromise
What a moron, your posts keep surprising me
possible we have a misunderstanding
it appeared to me that you argued in favor of gatekeeping technological progress instead of attempting to topple the system that perpetuates it
upon review, however, it seems the anon that we were both responding to was making a straw man argument that I thought was genuine
we've been bamboozled
this is why the nazis won, you can achieve everything with violence!
Did you miss the part where he was mentally tortured and brainwashed by MKUltra? And this is confirmed, not like Charles Manson.
I guess he was the first incel CIA incited to do violence
He wasn’t MK ultra’d. He wrote a letter about it
>He wrote a letter about it
>implying the glow-Es can't fake a letter
>he thinks the political system is there to make change
What a dumbass. All intelligent people know it is worthless trying to get into these rotten politics systems as an outsider. You will change nothing and waste your whole life. Better to make changes from the outside.
>194. Probably the revolutionaries should even AVOID assuming political power, whether by legal or illegal means, until the industrial system is stressed to the danger point and has proved itself to be a failure in the eyes of most people. Suppose for example that some "green" party should win control of the United States Congress in an election. In order to avoid betraying or watering down their own ideology they would have to take vigrous measures to turn economic growth into economic shrinkage. To the average man the results would appear disastrous: There would be massive unemployment, shortages of commodities, etc Even if the grosser ill effects could be avoided through superhumanly skillful management, still people would have to begin giving up the luxuries to which they have become addicted. Dissatisfaction would grow, the "green" party would be voted out o,f offfice and the revolutionaries would have suffered a severe setback. For this reason the revolutionaries should not try to acquire political power until the system has gotten itself into such a mess that any hardships will be seen as resulting from the failures of the industrial system itself and not from the policies of the revolutionaries. The revolution against technology will probably have to be a revolution by outsiders, a revolution from below and not from above.
quick draw scholar
Woah why didn't he justfollow in the steps of... That one guy... That politician who did good... Cant remember his name but surely you could just "become a politician" and change the world for the better.
Btw my iq is 93.
if he didn't send out bombs nobody would know his ideas and we wouldn't be talking about him right know.
it was by far the easyest way to get this much attention without connections and social skills
The conclusions of his beliefs allow no systemic position or ability to institute political and social change in conventional modern politics to the degree he wanted. With that in mind what he did was literally the only way he’d be able to spread his ideas, which somewhat worked since people still talk about him and his writings decades after the fact.
>Cinemaphile - television and film
It goes in all fields. Frick off back to r*ddit, moron.
what's the point of announcing a sage when you're going to get at least one reply to make fun of you, thus bumping the thread you intended to not bump?
unless you're one of the truly moronic that thinks sage downvotes a thread
have sex
inb4 Schindlers List
i heard he still answers letters addressed to him, often criticizing the sender's handwriting.
poor meme grandpa 🙁
Oh no no no no NONONONONO OOOOOOHHHH
ahHAHAHAHAHAHA AUGH-HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
TEDBROS I CANT BREATHE
it was already posted ITT, homosexual
Funny, I can't see any counter-arguments against him besides buzzowords and this troon episode
What is The Lego Movie.
I haven't read his manifesto but I'm not sure how he thinks society could not eventually trend towards technology
Even if you stop it by 1000 years, someone will rediscover science and proceed again with it
Technology is poisoning us across the board. If the average moron actually knew that all industrial methods of food production are irreparably destroying farmland, putting poison in the food and making everything have zero nutrition which means their kids are fricked, they would be furious. If you can count on one thing for the brainless masses, it’s that they get furious if you mess with their kids
My point is that any species capable of creating technology can simply not be stopped to do so. Technological development of a civilization is a natural process in itself, not dependent on indivduals will.
At best you can get something like Dune, with biotech replacing silicon wherever possible (but to reach that point, you need to pass through the dirty, polluting phases first, where you learn)
>Technological development of a civilization is a natural process in itself, not dependent on indivduals will.
yr discounting the material conditions that allow for rapid industrialization to take place
nobody seriously argues that the transition from mud hut to amish is a disaster for the human soul
the acceleration of technological development following industrialization is the crux of his critiques
>this is where the material conditions come into play
the abundant resources which allowed for industrialization in the first place are gone
the effort needed to extract copper, coal, oil, etc has increased exponentially for rapidly diminishing results, held aloft by our ability to scale technology
this is to say that if you had a collapse scenario and wanted to re-start the process, humanity would likely stall out technologically and likely wouldn't reach our current level of tech for many, many years- even with all of the information available to us
>species is killing itself using its technology
>yOu CaNt JuSt StOp
From my understanding he isn't against technology per se, as long as it's used as a tool to serve humanity, he's against technology that humans become dependent on. For instance we invented cars to help us travel long distances in shorter time, but after that we developed cities around cars, so that if one day cars ever stop working it would a mess. Now apply that to the internet where everything is getting digitalized, if internet suddenly stopped working all at once society would collapse in the blink of an eye
A society where only a certain number of developments are allowed per year to be sustainable would just be absurdly difficult to set up. It goes directly against human nature, which creates inequalities and exponential distributions (winner takes most) in every scenario
That said, unless you believe reddit-tier climate change doomsayers, we are well on our way to a kardashev I type civilization, and making a mess in the process is completely normal and expected. A similar mess will probably be made when transitioning from type I to type II civilization.
>where only a certain number of developments are allowed per year to be sustainable
i don't think anyone ITT (let alone Ted) would argue in favor of a system like that
I just pointed out that if there were a hard reset situation in which our current technological inertia halted, there is a high probability that we would never get back to where our society currently is
You can stop them by not telling lies about the tech that is being used. That is the only reason we currently have unrestrained industrial taping of the population and the planet. It’s how every bit of bad “progression” has been shut down to date. You’re a fricking moron
many of the slippery slopes inherent to a new technology cannot feasibly be foreseen
attempting "moderate" progress technologically is a fallacy dude
It’s called we do a little research before allowing this shit to be used. Oh wait they do that then they hide the results. Drug companies knew the run off would poison the water, pesticide companies knew that shit would genocide bugs and poison our food.
This shit is very foreseen and none of it deserves to see the light of day unless it is safe. Are you double vaxxed by any chance?
>Oh wait they do that then they hide the results
yeah bro just tell them to stop haha that'll do the trick
>Drug companies knew the run off would poison the water, pesticide companies knew that shit would genocide bugs and poison our food.
the system tolerates and necessitates these behaviors
also, you're taking an oddly immature approach to looking at the problems inherent to new technologies being purely physical changes to environment
a large part of the discussion is how technology has effectively neutered the soul of human beings, reduced them to lines of code in worldwide computer program, and caused widespread despair completely unheard of in history
immediate physical consequences are obvious because they are first-order issues, secondary and tertiary (and so on) problems are extremely difficult to anticipate with accuracy
>Are you double vaxxed by any chance?
...no.
>we are well on our way to a kardashev I type civilization
idk man this seems more reddit to me than thinking our consumption ideology is unsustainable and might frick up our planet
It will for sure frick up the biosphere but it will be recoverable damage. Life is way more resilient than people think, even if you cover the planet with tsar bombs it will eventually resurface. In a few decades we will mature climate engineering, truly efficient solar + batteris, and nuclear fusion, and that'll be plenty.
I'm not sure I get your point. People are being lied about the tech?
> That is the only reason we currently have unrestrained industrial taping of the population and the planet.
The reason is our industrial processes are still primitive. They will evolve, and the Earth will heal. But they are necessary for now.
Certainly not in a small timeframe. But even 10000 years isn't much in both human and Earth history.
>The reason is our industrial processes are still primitive. They will evolve, and the Earth will heal.
Fricking techno-optimist filth. We have practically razed the earth with our current farming methods and politicians are scrabbling to pass off the real cause to anything else; war & climate change being the two big excuses. We are about to lose billions of people to starvation, and if forced to choose they will not pick dumbfrick tech loving Westerners like you to survive. I hope you get crushed to death by one of those plastic wind turbines you love so much. Your body can degrade around the permanent structure that cannot be recycled. c**t
come on guys ted wouldnt want us arguing about trannies on the internet lets all go plant some crops
can you just stream yourself planting crops and ill watch? thanks
He criticised liberals as well as Raegan-era conservatives, so do most people on this board. Are you trying to have a "gotcha" moment, troony?
no he's totally right about the left. He realized the left's inconsistencies as he was going through college
moron lol. Imagine thinking the third position is conservative.
Funnily enough, this is pretty much the only excerpt he criticizes conservatism, whereas he spends an extended amount of time dissecting the inherent flaws of leftism
if you abstract it a bit, that's kind of how many people in media treat dem/repubs in reverse
he identifies cons as weakly wanting things which are obviously good, but undermining themselves and being hypocritical / foolish / useless. then he discusses at length why leftism is a suicide cult headed by sociopaths
Correct
yet no where does he outright say the left is stupid/fool
he probably assumes the reader already knows. it was the 90s after all
All of us in modern society are hemmed in by a dense network of rules and regulations. We are at the mercy of large organizations such as corporations, governments, labor unions, universities, churches, and political parties, and consequently we are powerless. As a result of the servitude, the powerlessness, and the other indignities that the System inflicts on us, there is widespread frustration, which leads to an impulse to rebel. And this is where the System plays its neatest trick: Through a brilliant sleight of hand, it turns rebellion to its own advantage.
Many people do not understand the roots of their own frustration, hence their rebellion is directionless. They know that they want to rebel, but they don't know what they want to rebel against. Luckily, the System is able to fill their need by providing them with a list of standard and stereotyped grievances in the name of which to rebel: racism, homophobia, women's issues, poverty, sweatshops…the whole laundry-bag of "activist" issues.
Huge numbers of would-be rebels take the bait. In fighting racism, sexism, etc., etc., they are only doing the System's work for it. In spite of this, they imagine that they are rebelling against the System. How is this possible?
First, 50 years ago the System was not yet committed to equality for black people, women and homosexuals, so that action in favor of these causes really was a form of rebellion. Consequently these causes came to be conventionally regarded as rebel causes. They have retained that status today simply as a matter of tradition; that is, because each rebel generation imitates the preceding generations.
Second, there are still significant numbers of people, as I pointed out earlier, who resist the social changes that the System requires, and some of these people even are authority figures such as cops, judges, or politicians. These resisters provide a target for the would-be rebels, someone for them to rebel against. Commentators like Rush Limbaugh help the process by ranting against the activists: Seeing that they have made someone angry fosters the activists' illusion that they are rebelling.
Third, in order to bring themselves into conflict even with that majority of the System's leaders who fully accept the social changes that the System demands, the would-be rebels insist on solutions that go farther than what the System's leaders consider prudent, and they show exaggerated anger over trivial matters. For example, they demand payment of reparations to black people, and they often become enraged at any criticism of a minority group, no matter how cautious and reasonable.
In this way the activists are able to maintain the illusion that they are rebelling against the System. But the illusion is absurd. Agitation against racism, sexism, homophobia and the like no more constitutes rebellion against the System than does agitation against political graft and corruption. Those who work against graft and corruption are not rebelling but acting as the System's enforcers: They are helping to keep the politicians obedient to the rules of the System. Those who work against racism, sexism, and homophobia similarly are acting as the Systems' enforcers: They help the System to suppress the deviant racist, sexist, and homophobic attitudes that cause problems for the System.
But the activists don't act only as the System's enforcers. They also serve as a kind of lightning rod that protects the System by drawing public resentment away from the System and its institutions. For example, there were several reasons why it was to the System's advantage to get women out of the home and into the workplace. Fifty years ago, if the System, as represented by the government or the media, had begun out of the blue a propaganda campaign designed to make it socially acceptable for women to center their lives on careers rather than on the home, the natural human resistance to change would have caused widespread public resentment. What actually happened was that the changes were spearheaded by radical feminists, behind whom the System's institutions trailed at a safe distance. The resentment of the more conservative members of society was directed primarily against the radical feminists rather than against the System and its institutions, because the changes sponsored by the System seemed slow and moderate in comparison with the more radical solutions advocated by feminists, and even these relatively slow changes were seen as having been forced on the System by pressure from the radicals.
tl;dr-
he explains in detail why they are foolish and stupid
no he calls out their inconsistencies. He does not call them stupid any where
I only read a bit of his manifesto but I do remember him saying that leftists are insecure and only identify with the losers of society because they themselves are losers.
I remember that. Unfortunately I don't think that's the case anymore. He probably wrote that in the 80s/90s when Gen X/Kurt Cobain types were the most outspoken leftists. Now we have Ivy League and art school trust fund kiddies who by all accounts are doing pretty well, at least financially. I'm sure some of the art school SJWs are real losers but the majority of outspoken leftists today are boujee yuppies with decent jobs lined up, possibly from nepotism
lol
>6. Almost everyone will agree that we live in a deeply troubled society. One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern society
in general. 7. But what is leftism? During the first half of the 20th century leftism could have been practically identified with socialism.Today the movement is fragmented and it is not
clear who can properly be called a leftist. When we speak of leftists in this article we have in mind mainly socialists, collectivists, “politically correct” types, feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists and the like. But
not everyone who is associated with one of these movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing leftism is not so much movement or an ideology as a psychological type, or rather a collection of related types. Thus, what we mean by “leftism” will emerge more clearly
in the course of our discussion of leftist psychology. (Also, see paragraphs 227-230.)
Right, but he isn't talking about conservatives like Trump. He's talking about RINOs like Mitt Romney.
Did he send bombs to politicians/congressmen/people of influence or just random people?
Mostly insignificant people involved in tech. But the head of some lumbering company was one of his targets. Keep in mind his bombings weren’t exactly a pre-meditated attempt to change things, he was lashing out because one of his favorite areas of nature had gotten ravaged by construction.
there's another one somewhere where he writes about the idea of "we're so much freer now to do what we want than the past"
the gist is that over time the meaningful decisions a person can make shrink while the meaningless ones (who to have sex with, what other people call you, what sex you have, your name, what brand of XYZ you have, your consumption-based hobby, etc) increase massively so as to mask the illusion of choice and freedom while shrinking meaningful autonomy
he didn't bring up trannies specifically because it was written before troonyhood was fashionable, but it's a pretty great example
>In this way the activists are able to maintain the illusion that they are rebelling against the System. But the illusion is absurd. Agitation against racism, sexism, homophobia and the like no more constitutes rebellion against the System than does agitation against political graft and corruption. Those who work against graft and corruption are not rebelling but acting as the System's enforcers: They are helping to keep the politicians obedient to the rules of the System. Those who work against racism, sexism, and homophobia similarly are acting as the Systems' enforcers: They help the System to suppress the deviant racist, sexist, and homophobic attitudes that cause problems for the System.
This is basically saying "these morons are doing the literal opposite of what they think they are doing" in a paragraph. Are you dense?
no thats how you're interpreting it. He's saying these guys are are counter productive. No where does he say they are stupid. Just that their inefficient and lack finesse. from his writings it is clear he respects the left. While he outright calls the conservatives fools
Look man, you seem kind of delusional, so I'm going to stop replying. You can have the last word if you want.
nah man, you cant directly find any evidence of him calling the left stupid. As much as pains me and you, the left is better than conservative ideology
>spends pages detailing what's wrong with modern leftism
>nah man he didn't call the left stupid
His overall point of modern technology becoming more and more dehumanizing wasn’t wrong. His solution of blowing up random people in the mail, most of whom were just people he personally had a grudge with, was not going to fix that. He wasn’t Sarah Connor in T2 trying to stop skynet. He had a decent cause but used it as justification for his own madness.
I still remember the first time I really read about Ted K seriously. I always thought the Unabomber was just some nut, but it blew my mind to find out that he was a mathematical genius. Could you imagine watching the news back in the 90s when they finally got him? It's like real life kino, if someone wrote it into a movie people would say it's unbelievable.
i wanted a genuine recommendation. where are they, i love this trope?
I can't find the original meme image but I remember ozymandias from the watchmen comics was one of the two in that tier.
For all of the people in this thread who worship and agree with him, why are you on Cinemaphile in the first place? Why not practice what you preach?
>INB4 uhhhh Ted said we can use the internets to spread our ideas so it’s fine OK?
You’re not doing that. Stop coping.
We truly live in a society, my friend.
Industrial society has tricked me into using my computer.
literally >and yet you use an iphone argument
You’re not doing that? Like 10 years ago saw some finn talk about isaif on /misc/ and got so hook it was a 180 degree turn in my life, Ted literally described who I was and the root of the problem, it doesn't mean that now I'm going to do whatever that Ted wants, it means that there are lots of people out there tired of this bullshit and we need to keep building up anti tech tecnology ideas in "the enemy camp"
Yeah I’m sure you’re building up anti tech ideas when you idle on Cinemaphile threads and jerk off. Stop pretending that you’re waging an e-war through telling people to read anti tech revolution.
because you cannot function in today's society without using technology
I know if society collapses I absolutely will not manage on my own but he's still right about everything. If Earth were lucky we'd be wiped out by a Gamma ray burst.
I would unironically have a gf and wouldn't be a miserable virgin if it wasn't for industrial society
Industrial society facilitates loneliness and isolation.
He didn't need to blow people up to make his point. Couldn't he have settled for blowing up some useless monuments or government buildings instead of normies?
Except for the fact he targeted universities instead of corporate entities because he was a pussy.
It's actually really easy to find fault with his ideas. He gets attention, to a degree deservedly for his maths genius, trying to put things into practice, and pulling off the bombing campaign(making bombs is dangerous and not easy)
His political writings are a mess. You can poke holes and just spam "source?" every couple of lines
I think the most glaring and repetitive blind spot outside of just saying things and taking them for granted without evidencing them is the frequent absence of class in most of his writings. The "system" is portrayed essentially as a conscious entity, its will basically divorced from human will. We're just along for the ride. And to a degree this is true. But when you take class out of the equation like this, you miss so much of the equation of why the system "decides" to behave like this, the conflicting interests between the classes within it, the mechanism by which the dominant classes decide to act as the "system" wills. And this of course precludes the possibility of a different form of technological system based on different premises, of a different class character, that will behave differently because its that different on a cellular level
The core correct gripe Ted has with technological society is alienation from labour. But because he basically thinks technology gets you what we have now or worse, because there's no room for a technological society based on different premesis in response to developing material conditions, the only place to go is backwards and just hope it was somehow less shitty(somehow less shitty even though time and time again "primitive" people absolutely fall in love with modern technology and adopt it as soon as they can comprehend a use for it. Eskimos were using snowmobiles after like 5 minutes)
The only way out is through. How the frick could you sustainably go back to pre-industrial lifestyles. Even if the global system per se collapses we don't just lose all this technology lying around
Technology doesn't have to be bad, the part which is inherently bad is how mainstream technology offers ""Social Media"" which ends up just exposing you to everything you don't actually need to see and drains you of any fulfillment you could get through expending effort by giving it to you without any actual labour or effort. People would rather get their enjoyment for free rather than work for it which to me seems like the biggest problem with technology currently. And as for the guy asking why we are here when Ted probably wouldn't approve of it, it's because technology is unnavoidable and i'd rather spend my time communicating with people I don't know and not be held accountable for what I say than have a presence actually exist online and trick myself in to thinking people actually care. Cinemaphile and other anonymous message boards are infinitely better than other forms of social media because there isn't a reward for posting, you don't climb a social ladder nor do you have any permanant record. And the best part is I can type all of this and nobody knows what or who I actually am. Once I leave this thread and it archives it exits mine and everyone elses conciousness. It's perfect.
literal midwit
>I think the most glaring and repetitive blind spot outside of just saying things and taking them for granted without evidencing them is the frequent absence of class in most of his writings
mouth breather
Trust fund kiddie detected
>His political writings are a mess
Ted is a hardcore autonomist, you can ascribe political leanings / opinions to him but they are ad-hoc and mostly reflect on your own political lens filtering his ideas.
>You can poke holes and just spam "source?" every couple of lines
Technological Slavery & Anti-Tech Revolution: Why & How are pretty exhaustively cited and sourced. Pretty sure ATR had ten pages of works cited, with some pretty fricking good biographies / history books in there. It helps to argue a point when you read updated versions of what you have an opinion on.
>The "system" is portrayed essentially as a conscious entity, its will basically divorced from human will.
The portrayal is pretty irrelevant as it's simply a name used to describe a gestalt of technological processes, innovation, zeitgeists, etc. The fact that he mildly personifies it to make things more readable doesn't detract from the points.
>But when you take class out of the equation like this, you miss so much of the equation of why the system "decides" to behave like this
holy kek
>the mechanism by which the dominant classes decide to act as the "system" wills.
"Whatever illegal acts may be committed by politicians, cops, or CEOs as individuals, theft, bribery, and graft are not part of the System but diseases of the System. The less stealing there is, the better the System functions, and that is why the servants and boosters of the System always advocate obedience to the law in public, even if they may sometimes find it convenient to break the law in private."
>And this of course precludes the possibility of a different form of technological system based on different premises, of a different class character, that will behave differently because its that different on a cellular level
HOLY KEK
This dude literally read "the system" and his only conclusion was "capitalism bad"
There's no possible scenario where I have to work 8 hours a day and live in a modern city where I find myself happy.
I'm so fricking tired of Cinemaphile contrarians. I think I'll take a break from this homosexual place.
>monke
it's reddit meme tho
dilate
or you can just laugh at them like everyone with a brain instead of taking it seriously
arguing in a market of ideas is fun
"just laugh at them" has always been lame unless the people you are laughing at are turbo normies
see you tomorrow
>AHHHHHH I AM TOO STUPID TO UNDERSTAND PROGRAMMING, FINANCE, OR ENGINEERING, SO IT MUST BE ALL PART OF A DEVILISH PLOT
that MK-ultra shit was crazy bro
i swear we live in a fricking tv show
you think the plot points just happen to intertwine like that?
no! they orchestrated it! the powers at be!
>Another episode of 'Cinemaphile ignores somebody's misdeeds and the lives they destroyed just because they agree with what the person said'
This. Imagine going on and on about the evils of the modern world and then going on to attack some literally who replaceable gear goys, because he was too scared that the FBI would btfo him immediately if he attacked a power station or highway bridge
His actions were wrong, I think everyone agrees with that, but his motives were completely understandable.