Has anyone read it?
Should we all live in an liberagrarian society free from recursive autmation?
Has anyone read it?
We'd most likely die.
Technology in itself isn't bad, but you see the problem with society is that there's too much bloat.
That doesn't answer the question, although that is an implicated "yes".
We should be hunters and gatherers, agriculture is considered harmful.
Equatorial-tropical countries are the only ones feasible for that idea. The problem is /k/ fags will just ruin small communities.
It won't be self-sustaining due to the need of government assistance (while the government themselves can send and fund /k/ fags to fuck you up).
Either way, that's not really stable. Landwar '/k/ommies' and real estate porky fags will be your last boss.
This, us moderate unabombers don't have a problem with a small amount of technology, so long as it doesn't get out of hand and turn the vast majority of us into slaves. Unfortunately we're well on our way down that road.
FUCK OFF FBI, DO YOUR JOB ARREST CLINTON, NEETS ARE YOUR GREATEST ALLY
What? Vast swathes of Eurasia hosted agrarian societies for millennia.
What part of OP's post indicated a willingness to break the law?
Ted would like Holla Forums. He hits the nail on the head on the psychology of shitlibs but offers no realistic solution and expects everyone else to do the heavy lifting like a Holla Forums version of an ideas guy.
Not gonna happen. An unfeasible idea is a bad idea, like whenever Holla Forums says "let's just kill all nonwhites in the US". Would be nice, sure, but they just can't accept that this is incredibly unrealistic. They'd rather just follow their dumb idea straight into the grave.
Certainly his ideal is impossible, and he even concedes in his later writings that there's no way to stop the process from repeating again. Any anarcho-primitivist who thinks they have any chance of success is deluded.
I think the big takeaway should be that we consider his arguments against technology before we approve them. Ethical evaluation of our technologies before we release them should be routine, in the same way that researchers justify their experiments on humans or other animals before they conduct them. Does the value your technology provides mankind exceed the harm caused by environmental destruction, atomization, harm of non-compliance or non-use, psychological or physiological dysfunction, etc.?
He'll probably would hate Holla Forums. Bootlickers are not his friend.
Uncle Ted would hate Holla Forums because it's full of fucking idiots.
But if you really want to know, you can write him. I don't know if his address has changed, but it used to be:
US Penitentiary — Max
P.O. Box 8500
Florence, CO 8126-8500
You don't get it lad
Holla Forums is the boots!
Now get on your knees and start licking faggot
kys cia nigger.
Nah m8, he put those ideas into practice. We're the ones sitting on the sidelines not doing anything while we let our team lose the game.
It's either going to be whites or nonwhites that get eradicated. Currently it's looking like whites. Not so unrealistic.
But here's the thing, you can't just put up walls and kill everyone else while your birth rates are plummeting. What we need are kids. Lots of them. The rest of the world should be complaining that we're filling their countries up with our kids and flipping their cultures. We need to attack the cause of our low birthrates, and force low birthrates on others, and then we win.
KYS, Holla Forumstard
There is no way to win a race to the bottom while keeping standards at the same time. A white kid who grows up to be a self-hating race-mixing shitlib or a feminist or a tranny or a shabbos goy is another point in the anti-whites favor. Nonwhites don't worry about standards, they just keep pumping out babies every 9 months for those sweet, sweet gibs.
The people who told you the world is overpopulated also tell you to send food to Africa where they expect to grow to 5 billion by 2100. You fell for the lie. It's just another excuse to convince whites not to breed while they breed your replacements.
Quality doesn't matter if they're produced below repopulation. You'll just wind up with the brightest, most cultured, last white man alive. Who dies.
So you agree then, great.
I guess Japan does not exist in the Holla Forumstard's fantasy world.
So? It would be a great end. There is no inherent value to life and it will end anyway.
My point is, the reproduction game is rigged against whites because they have a more strenuous win condition.
In order to win, whites must outproduce nonwhites AND reproduce only with whites.
In order to win, nonwhites must outproduce whites.
The real enemy here is genetics. The recessive-only nature of whiteness means that a generational line of whiteness is easy to escape but extremely difficult to return to. (Or outright impossible if you believe in the one-drop rule.)
Radicalized tech savvy people like those on Holla Forums and /g/ usually recognise what Unabomber wrote in his manifestos yet use their time and efforts to bicker about inconsequential shit instead of doing something about it.
This deviates a bit but read Michael Ruppert's books and Limits to Growth. Our society isn't sustainable and no amount of technological advances will change the limited amounts of resources this planet provides us with.
let's spread like locusts suck dry the universe
Hey, OP, congratz on your *chan slide script. It works great, as far as I can see, but you might wanna look and see that-- yeah, this is Holla Forums not Holla Forums buddy :^)
I see automation as an evolutionary process. There's a good reason we're not living in huts chucking spears at animals and shitting in fields. People can become too reliant on automation and technology, but this is not the fault of the automation or the technology. It's like putting a gun on trial for murder. It makes no sense whatsoever. I've read Industrial Society and it's Future. Some of what he says rings true, but Ted is a modern day Luddite. He thinks the glass is half empty when it's almost full.
Fuck off, kike.
No he didn't.
Word. Thoughtful use of technology could enhance the environment and our lives, but short sighted and selfish use of technology will doom us. Consider the technology of the metal knife; it can be used for murder, or it can be used to prepare a meal. All technology is a double edged sword in this way, for all technology really does is multiply our power. What we choose to do with that power is the salient question.
Or it can be used for murder and it can be used to prepare a meal from your victim's corpse.
Think outside the box, user.
Computers should never had become accessible to normalfags. It should have stayed a scientific tool.
Old computers were used as much for business and government as science though.
Combine Unabomber with David Lane and then you're golden.
Disagree. It was an experiment worth making: without PC's there would have been no Internet, which meant to function as library of knowledge AND comms medium. Unfortunately this idea failed in practice and the normies have turned computers and internet into entertainment instead of learning resource (totally different from what we do right now on this imageboard no sarcasm tbh).
But don't worry, the pendulum swings back, and (((they're))) taking back the computers AND internet from normies. Did you pay attention to UEFI secure boot, Intel ME and AMD's similar crap? Or the net neutrality bs? They're taking it all back. Soon enough the only computers available will be tracker chips.
False. There was already an Internet without personal computers. Personal computers did not create the Internet.
>(((they're))) taking back the computers AND internet from normies
They don't and they won't. The interweb is the strongest electric jew they ever made. They'll only take the ability to use a computer, only leaving the possibility of being used by it.