Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Industrial Society and its Future”: the writings of the Unabomber

roelpeters.be

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 197 posts

Re: “Industrial Society and its Future”: the writings of the Unabomber

#111

Post by dri_ft »

DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #3
roelp_be wrote: post #2

I was intrigued by "Industrial Society and its Future" by Ted Kaczynski after watching the "Manhunt" series on Netflix. As a techno-optimist it helped me put my feet on the ground. If you're like me, I can recommend the book. Not a fan of books? Read my blog post.

I urge anyone who reads Kaczinski to dive into Jacques Ellul. Kaczinky was heavily inspired by his writing. I studied Ellul for around 2 years and I can't say that it didn't effect my whole attitude on "Tech as a solution" for our problems. I certainly understood (although I don't condone) why Kaczinsky did what he did: The Technological Society: https://archive.org/details/JacquesEllulTheTechnologicalSoci... Propaga…

Thanks for the recommendation.

Re: “Industrial Society and its Future”: the writings of the Unabomber

#112

Post by LatteLazy »

leto_ii wrote: post #106
LatteLazy wrote: post #88

Plenty of people have pointed out that changes to society create problems and even leave us worse off in terms of happiness or health or freedom etc. I'd recommend Jared Diamond on agriculture for a shorter, better written, non homicidal alternative: https://www.discovermagazine.com/planet-earth/the-worst-mist... But here is thing: you don't get to decide. You're whole society doesn't get to decide. You have to do wh…

> But here is thing: you don't get to decide. You're whole society doesn't get to decide. This is why we have established what is sometimes called a 'rule-based international order', so that we can have a world where might makes right doesn't apply anymore. Where the weak get protection and the strong are compelled to act morally and legally. Unfortunately, of course, the rules mostly stay on paper and the world cont…

This is the core issue: how do you get everyone, every single person on earth, all 7bn to agree not to be dicks, not to want more than a bare subsistence lifestyle, not to engage in violence or coercion and not to invent tech?

If we could solve human nature, we could have any ideological system. Communism would work, or anarcho capitalism or whatever.

But we can't.

We can't get people to cut back enough to avoid a global warming catastropy.

Re: “Industrial Society and its Future”: the writings of the Unabomber

#113

Post by cm2187 »

Synaesthesia wrote: post #95
cm2187 wrote: post #58

I am no fan of cancel culture / deplatforming people but I do make an exception for terrorists. I don’t think we should be promoting the manifesto of terrorists as it creates horrible incentives, and vindicates their action. I agree with the approach of obfuscating their names and not reporting on their manifesto. If you want to make a grand standing against science and technology, please find another source.

Why don’t you say what you disagree with and provide a criticism?

Again, this isn't about the manifesto. It is about giving a platform to a terrorist. It is because they knew their manifesto would be published and read that the terrorists behind the 2011 Norway attacks or Christchurch mosque attack acted that way. And it worked as planned, providing incentives for more acts of terror.

If you want to make a criticism again science and technology, please do. But I think it is inappropriate to publish or reference a terrorist's manifesto.

Re: “Industrial Society and its Future”: the writings of the Unabomber

#114

Post by tptacek »

I don't understand the fascination. Kaczynski was deeply ill, in ways that were somewhat apparent even before we knew he was trying to murder people, as he repeatedly failed to live a life in the continued presence of others. Instead, he lived in a dirty shack with a hole cut in its floor as a toilet (the irony of the lifestyle upgrade he's received with his cell in ADX Florence is widely noted). Kevin Kelly does a good job of putting the manifesto itself in context; there's little in it that hasn't been articulated well elsewhere. For decades, he struck out practically at random --- we all read about Gelernter, but less attention is paid to the time he attempted to down a passenger airplane. To me, it's all just another instance of us mascotizing the mentally ill. If these ideas appeared instead in a LiveJournal archive, nobody would care.

It's not that his writing or his ideas are dangerous; deranged killers will find reasons to maim and murder people whether or not we write blog posts about "manifestos". It's that there's so little reason to believe any of his work is worth our time.

Re: “Industrial Society and its Future”: the writings of the Unabomber

#115

Post by luckylion »

andrepd wrote: post #87
Swenrekcah wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>He proposes that "leftists" have this belief in their own freedom, but that this freedom is a delusion. Interesting, because my pet theory is that what determines if people lean left or right is their belief in their own free will. Those that truly believe they are completely free and autonomus from society and their environment will naturally favor right wing policies, but those that believe they are largely a prod…

Doesn't really matter what you "believe" if it's demonstrably true that you're shaped by your environment.

"Shaped" is somewhat different from fatalism though. Do you have a choice in the matter, or is there no choice at all and you're just going through the motions that your genes ("what you started with") + the environment ("what happened to you") determined for you?

Re: “Industrial Society and its Future”: the writings of the Unabomber

#116

Post by Miner49er »

zozbot234 wrote: post #47
daenz wrote: post #23

Some people here can't seem to separate ideas from the person who generates them, and that is sad. You can hate what a person did and still try to understand why they did it. That does not equate to support for them. It's this kind of closed-mindedness that is driving people apart all over the world.

> Some people here can't seem to separate ideas from the person who generates them Would these writings be considered famous or even worthwhile if it wasn't for this person's actions? I think the answer is quite clear.

Kaczynski acknowledges that it wouldn't be if it wasn't for his violence in his Manifesto.

Re: “Industrial Society and its Future”: the writings of the Unabomber

#117

Post by cm2187 »

arez wrote: post #50
jamesdhutton wrote: post #12

He murdered people to publicize his manifesto. I feel that if I were to read it, I would be encouraging others to kill to get their views known. So I won't be reading it, regardless of its merits.

you can buy "Mein Kampf" anytime if you want, I doubt you get anything useful out of it or become a mass murderer if you read it. If you ban books or thoughts or manifestos you end up being totalitarian you becoming the very thing you try to fight against

Hitler didn't kill 6 millions jews so people would read Mein Kampf.

Re: “Industrial Society and its Future”: the writings of the Unabomber

#118

Post by Miner49er »

LatteLazy wrote: post #88

Plenty of people have pointed out that changes to society create problems and even leave us worse off in terms of happiness or health or freedom etc. I'd recommend Jared Diamond on agriculture for a shorter, better written, non homicidal alternative: https://www.discovermagazine.com/planet-earth/the-worst-mist... But here is thing: you don't get to decide. You're whole society doesn't get to decide. You have to do wh…

I think this is a good point. You're basically saying the strongest and most violent always wins out, not necessarily the best idea. Maybe that's part of the reason Kaczynski turned to violence.

Re: “Industrial Society and its Future”: the writings of the Unabomber

#119

Post by leto_ii »

LatteLazy wrote: post #112
leto_ii wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But here is thing: you don't get to decide. You're whole society doesn't get to decide. This is why we have established what is sometimes called a 'rule-based international order', so that we can have a world where might makes right doesn't apply anymore. Where the weak get protection and the strong are compelled to act morally and legally. Unfortunately, of course, the rules mostly stay on paper and the world cont…

This is the core issue: how do you get everyone, every single person on earth, all 7bn to agree not to be dicks, not to want more than a bare subsistence lifestyle, not to engage in violence or coercion and not to invent tech? If we could solve human nature, we could have any ideological system. Communism would work, or anarcho capitalism or whatever. But we can't. We can't get people to cut back enough to avoid a gl…

> how do you get everyone, every single person on earth, all 7bn to agree not to be dicks

Unfortunately, as you can imagine, I don't have an answer. I'm actually quite afraid that there's no answer and that we as a species aren't capable of large scale rational and compassionate cooperation.

The global warming catastrophe won't wait for us. I'm quite afraid that my life won't end nicely. I don't expect to have a long and peaceful retirement.

Re: “Industrial Society and its Future”: the writings of the Unabomber

#120

Post by Miner49er »

torb-xyz wrote: post #45

If you want to read a critique of modern industrialization and it impact on nature and society by someone who’s not a violent terrorist and has solutions beyond blowing shit up Murray Bookchin is probably a betyer bet.

Maybe some Thoreau as well.
Post reply on HN