Today we got the news of the passing on of Ted Kacynski. Some of you will know him better as the “Unabomber”. This might come as a surprise to a lot of you but I am an admirer of Ted. If you have only ever been spoon fed what you know about him and what he thought through the media then you are missing out on a very brilliant, insightful and funny man who opted out of our sick degenerate world and then decided to try to do something about it.
I know that is going to be controversial with a lot of you and I get it, but read at least some of his writings then come back here and tell me if you disagree with a word of it. I think you may be very uncomfortable with how close you identify and agree with it after years of being told how “crazy” he was. Give it a chance or listen to it read on youtube.
Ted had been suffering terminal cancer for a few years and today he found peace. One thing is sure. He may be gone but he will not be forgotten.
Scattered Shots 
Rage against the machine.
LikeLike
I think his ideas were sound but I don’t agree with bombing innocent people. He should’ve bombed the guilty, who are legion.
LikeLike
Kaczynski made some good points but I have a hard time hearing them over all the screaming of his victims.
LikeLike
as a thought experiment, if those victims had been the heads of phfizer or WHO. Jeff Bezos or Fauci would you still have a hard time hearing his points? Dont read any critique or attack on your point from me into that question. I ask because I am eternally curious about the strange ( to me) lines people draw on what are appropriate targets in this war that the system , or “deep state/globalist ” if you prefer, has been waging on us.
LikeLike
I suspect we’re in agreement. If I heard in the news that Boudra, Ghebreyesus and Fauci had all had their hands blown off by letter bombs one day, I’d be raising a glass of fine whiskey to the sender.
It’s an interesting point about the fine line between who you’d kill given the opportunity, and who you’d spare. For damn sure, my list of the former is extremely long.
LikeLike
My short answer to your question, Shawn, is “no, I don’t think different victim selection would affect my view of the morality of Kaczynski’s actions.” What Kaczynski did was murder, which is wrong. He could have murdered different people, but it’s still murder.
I’m not completely opposed to revolutions (or better, restorations), but they have to start with the construction of a parallel government and a parallel elite. A lone nut can kill as many of my enemies as he wants, if he’s not building a parallel structure for governance, well, the regime can drop an infinity of Faucis into that same slot and use the chaos to crack down on us fellow travelers. (Not that I’m particularly a fellow traveler of anarcho-primitivists, but you get my point.)
I think just war theory has some interesting things to say on this point: What’s the probability of success? Given any reasonable definition of “success,” Kaczynski’s tactic had a 0% chance of success. He would have had a lot more success if he’d self-published his stuff or just waited another 10 years and become a blogger.
McVeigh’s case is instructive here also: Granting arguendo that the ATF is an enemy of mine, and ignoring the question of whether McVeigh acted alone, what was the likelihood of “success” in McVeigh’s particular tactic? It was zero. And the end result has in fact been the opposite of success for any of my goals.
You can call it a war if you want to, but if you have zero probability of success, you’re just committing murder.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I see your point and from your outlook I can understand your stance on the matter. Ted had a very different goals in mind though with his actions, None of which was to establish a new system. I dont agree with the opinion that if he waited 10 years he would have gotten his point across with his writings. Without his actions,no one would have heard of his writings. And waiting 10 years would have defeated the purpose of trying to make people aware.
I will keep my thoughts on OKC to myself since we are both veering too far into Fed watch list territory here in the open public..
Ted did address the ” murder” and morality of his actions several times. To paraphrase, he doesn’t let it bother him much, or the thought of violence bother him much when few people seem to bat an eye over a million dead people in Iraq or Vietnam because the US government wanted to further it’s own goals. People are OK with violence when it suits the needs of the system and I agree with him on that.
LikeLike
LOL at your OKCity comments. Maybe I’ll take you out for a beer if I’m ever in your AO. Better yet, I’ll bring a six pack over and we can turn the radio WAY up.
I haven’t read a lot of Kaczynski, just some excerpts here and there as others have posted them. (His critique of leftism and modern “conservatism” are _very_ prescient.)
LikeLike