The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live. Tag: Unabomber Manifesto Pdf. Industrial Society and Its Future - an analysis. Posted on: | Author: Josh Archer | Categories: essays. Industrial. The Unabomber Trial: The Manifesto. Editor's Note: This is the text of a 35, word manifesto as submitted to The Washington Post and the New York Times by .
|Language:||English, Spanish, Indonesian|
|Genre:||Business & Career|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration Required]|
of an Amerikan public that can now seethat teehnology and liberty are incomp. table. For the first time in UK, we publish the Unabomber's manifesto in full. [PDF] Download The Unabomber Manifesto: Industrial Society and Its Future Ebook | READ ONLINE Download at. INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY AND ITS FUTURE J The Unabomber's Manifesto Aiui- Authorttartans Anonymous Po Box billpercompzulbe.ga U$.
The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in "advanced" countries, but they have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering in the Third World to physical suffering as well and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world.
The continued development of technology will worsen the situation. It will certainly subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased physical suffering even in "advanced" countries.
The industrial-technological system may survive or it may break down. If it survives, it MAY eventually achieve a low level of physical and psychological suffering, but only after passing through a long and very painful period of adjustment and only at the cost of permanently reducing human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. Furthermore, if the system survives, the consequences will be inevitable: There is no way of reforming or modifying the system so as to prevent it from depriving people of dignity and autonomy.
If the system breaks down the consequences will still be very painful. But the bigger the system grows the more disastrous the results of its breakdown will be, so if it is to break down it had best break down sooner rather than later. We therefore advocate a revolution against the industrial system. This revolution may or may not make use of violence; it may be sudden or it may be a relatively gradual process spanning a few decades. We can't predict any of that. But we do outline in a very general way the measures that those who hate the industrial system should take in order to prepare the way for a revolution against that form of society.
Its object will be to overthrow not governments but the economic and technological basis of the present society. In this article we give attention to only some of the negative developments that have grown out of the industrial-technological system.
Other such developments we mention only briefly or ignore altogether. This does not mean that we regard these other developments as unimportant. For practical reasons we have to confine our discussion to areas that have received insufficient public attention or in which we have something new to say. For example, since there are well-developed environmental and wilderness movements, we have written very little about environmental degradation or the destruction of wild nature, even though we consider these to be highly important.
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.
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 Even so, our conception of leftism will remain a good deal less clear than we would wish, but there doesn't seem to be any remedy for this. All we are trying to do here is indicate in a rough and approximate way the two psychological tendencies that we believe are the main driving force of modern leftism. Also, our discussion is meant to apply to modern leftism only.
We leave open the question of the extent to which our discussion could be applied to the leftists of the 19th and early 20th centuries. The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call "feelings of inferiority" and "oversocialization. By "feelings of inferiority" we mean not only inferiority feelings in the strict sense but a whole spectrum of related traits; low self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness, depressive tendencies, defeatism, guilt, self-hatred, etc.
We argue that modern leftists tend to have some such feelings possibly more or less repressed and that these feelings are decisive in determining the direction of modern leftism. When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said about him or about groups with whom he identifies we conclude that he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem.
This tendency is pronounced among minority rights activists, whether or not they belong to the minority groups whose rights they defend. They are hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities and about anything that is said concerning minorities.
The terms "negro," "oriental," "handicapped" or "chick" for an African, an Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no derogatory connotation. Some animal rights activists have gone so far as to reject the word "pet" and insist on its replacement by "animal companion.
They want to replace the world "primitive" by "nonliterate.
We do not mean to imply that primitive cultures ARE inferior to ours. We merely point out the hypersensitivity of leftish anthropologists. Those who are most sensitive about "politically incorrect" terminology are not the average black ghetto-dweller, Asian immigrant, abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of whom do not even belong to any "oppressed" group but come from privileged strata of society.
Political correctness has its stronghold among university professors, who have secure employment with comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual white males from middle- to upper-middle-class families. Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak women , defeated American Indians , repellent homosexuals or otherwise inferior.
The leftists themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with their problems. We do not mean to suggest that women, Indians, etc. ARE inferior; we are only making a point about leftist psychology. Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong and as capable as men.
Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable as men. Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc.
Thus it is clear that these faults are not the leftist's real motive for hating America and the West. He hates America and the West because they are strong and successful. Words like "self-confidence," "self-reliance," "initiative," "enterprise," "optimism," etc. The leftist is anti-individualistic, pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve everyone's problems for them, satisfy everyone's needs for them, take care of them.
He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense of confidence in his ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs. The leftist is antagonistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser. Art forms that appeal to modern leftish intellectuals tend to focus on sordidness, defeat and despair, or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment.
Modern leftish philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science, objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally relative.
It is true that one can ask serious questions about the foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of objective reality can be defined.
But it is obvious that modern leftish philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, their attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to the extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power.
More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true i.
The leftist's feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others.
Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual's ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is "inferior" it is not his fault, but society's, because he has not been brought up properly. The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of inferiority make him a braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter, a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost faith in himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, but he can still conceive of himself as having the capacity to be strong, and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant behavior.
Hisfeelings of inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as individually strong and valuable.
Hence the collectivism of the leftist. He can feel strong only as a member of a large organization or a mass movement with which he identifies himself. Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics. Leftists protest by lying down in front of vehicles, they intentionally provoke police or racists to abuse them, etc. These tactics may often be effective, but many leftists use them not as a means to an end but because they PREFER masochistic tactics.
Self-hatred is a leftist trait. Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principles, and moral principle does play a role for the leftist of the oversocialized type. But compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power. Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help.
For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms? Kaczynski has been convicted for illegally transporting, mailing, and using bombs, as well as killing two. Be destroyed and replaced by primitive society so that people will be free emdeon com pdfs errorlookup pdf again. Theodore J. World leftist, then you are free to designate the people Im referring to by some other term.
His frustration is echoed in these words from his manifesto.
In his Montana hermitage he was free to move about as much as the snow and weather permitted him. Podcasts, An Introduction to Permaculture 12gb torrent. Industrial Society and Its Future by Theodore Kaczynski was deleted on 22 October because its copyright status was in dispute.
Unabomber Manifesto is an unread, noninfluential document. Kaczynski is not interested in feeling free Kaczynski is interested in a. Al present all we can say is thai no True Believer will make a safe recruit lo llie revolu- tion unless his commitment is exclusively lo the destruction of technology. If he is committed also lo another ideal, he may want to use technology as a lool for pursuing thai olhcr ideal sec paragraphs Some readers may say, "This sluffuboui leftism is a lot of crap.
I know John and June who are lefiish types and hey don'l have all these lotalitarian Icndcncics. Our remarks about leftism are nol meant to apply to every individual lefiisi but to describe ihe general character of leftism as a movement.
And the general character or a movement is not necessarily determined by the numerical proportions of the various kinds or ieople involved in Ihe movement.
The people who rise lo positions of power in leftist ntovcincnls lend to be leftists of ihe most power-hungry lypc because power-hungry people arc those who si rive battiest lo gel into positions of power. Once ihe power-hungry types have captured conlrol of ihe move- ment, ihere arc many leftists of a genllcr breed who inwardly disapprove of many of the actions of ihe lenders, but cannot bring themselves lo oppose them. They need their faith in Ihe movement, and because they cannol give up litis failh ihcy go along with Ihe lenders, True, SOttH leftists do have the guls lo oppose Ihe totalitarian tendencies thai emerge, hut Ihey generally lose, because lite power-hungry types ate bciler oitiinizcd, aic more ruthless and Machiavellian and have laken care to build themselves a strong power base.
These phenomena appeared clearly in Russia and olhcr countries lli. Similarly, before Ihe breakdown of communism in the USSR, lefiish types in the West would seldom criticize llial country. If prodded Ihcy would admil hut llie UJj.
SK did many wrong tilings, but then ihey would try lo find excuses for l he communists and begin talking about die faults of the West. They alwnys opposed Western military resistance to communist aggression, Leftish lypes all over the world vigorously protested ihe U.
Not thai ihey approved of ihe Soviet actions; bul because of their leftist faith, they just couldn't bear lo put themselves in opposition lo communism. Today, in those or our universities where "political correctness" has become dominant, there are probably many leftist types who privately dis- approve of the suppression of academic freedom, but ihcy go along with il anyway.
Thus he fact that many individual leftists are personally mild and fairly tolerant people by no means prevents leftism as a whole form having a totalitarian tendency.
Our discussion of leftism has a serious weakness. It is still far from clear whal we mean by the word "leftist. Today leftism is fragmented into a whole spectrum of aclivisl movements. Yet not all activist movements arc leftist, and some activist movements e. Varieties of leftists fade out gradually inlo vari- eties of non-leftists and we ourselves would often be hnrd-presscd to decide whether a given individual is or is not a leftist.
To the extent thai il is defined at all, our conception of leftism is defined by the discussion of it lhat we have given in this article, and we can pnly advise Ihe reader to use his own judgment in deciding who is a leftist. But il will be helpful lo list some criteria for diagnosing leftism.
These criteria cannot be applied in a cut and dried manner. Some individuals may meet some of the criteria without being leftists, some leftists may not mcel any of the crilcrin.
Again, you just have lo use your judgment. I Ic wants society lo solve everyone's needs for litem, take enre of them. He is not the soil of pci son who has an inner sense ol confidence in his own ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs, flic leftist is anlagonislic to ihe concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser. Art forms lhat appeal to modern leftist intellectuals tend to focus on sordiilness.
Modem leftist philosophers end lo dismiss reason, science, objective reality and to insist lhat everything is culturally relative. It is rue that one can ask serious questions about Ihe foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, ihe concept of objective reality can be defined. Bul it is obvious that modern leftist philosophers arc not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge.
Ihcy arc deeply involved emotionally in their attack on n nth and reality. They attack these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, iheir attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to ihe extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true i.
The leftist's feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other ihings as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of menial illness and of ihe utility of IQ tests. Leftists arc antagonistic lo genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior lo others.
Leftists prefer lo give society ihe credit or blame for an individual's ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is "inferior" it is nol his fault, but society's, because he has not been brought up properly. The leftist is nol typically the kind of person whose feelings of inferiority make him a brng- garl, an egotist, a bully, a self- pro molcr, a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost failh in himself, lie has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, bul he can Mill conceive of himself as having the capacity lo be strong, and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant behavior.
His feelings of Inferiority arc so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself ns individually strong and v ul liable, llcncc the collectivism of the leftist.
He can feci strong only ns a member of a large organization or a mass movement wilh which he identifies himself. Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics, Leftists protest by lying down in front of vehicles, they intentionally provoke police or racists to abuse them, etc.
These tactics may often be effective, but many leftists use hem nol as a means lo an end but because they prefer masochistic tactics. Self-halted is a leftist trait. Lcftisls may claim lhat their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principle, and moral principle does play a role for the Icftisl of the ovcrsocialized type.
But compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is loo promincul a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power. Moreover, much leftist bchnvior is not rationally calculated lo be of benefit lo the people whom the leftists claim to be trying lo help.
For example, tT one believes lhat affirmative action is good Tor black people, does it make sense lo demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms?
Obviously il would be more productive to lake n diplomatic and conciliatory approach llml would make al Icasl verbal and symbolic concessions to while people who think thai affirmative action discrimi- nates against llicm, But lefiisi activists do nol lake such an approach because il would not satisfy their emotional needs.
Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race prob- lems serve as an excuse for ihem to express Iheir own hostility and frustrated need for power. In doing so they actually harm black people, because the activists' hostile attitude toward the while majority tends lo intensify race hatred. If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would have to invent problems in order lo provide themselves with an excuse for making a fuss.
We emphasize that tlie foregoing does not pretend to be an accurate description of everyone who might be considered a leftist.
It is only a rough indication of a general tendency of leftism. Psychologists use the term "socialization" to designate the process by which children arc trained to think and act as society demands.
A person is said to be well socialized if he be- lieves in and obeys the moral code of his society and fits in well as a functioning part of that society. It may seem senseless to say that many leftists are over-socialized, since the leftist is perceived as a rebel. Nevertheless, the position can be defended.
Many leftists are not such rebels as they seem. The moral code of our society is so demanding that no one can think, feci and act in a completely moral way. For example, wc are not supposed to hate anyone, yet almost every- one hates somebody nt some lime or other, whether he admits H to himself or not. Some people are so highly socialized thai the attempt to think, feel and act morally imposes a severe burden on them.
In order to avoid feelings of guilt, they continually have to deceive them- selves about their own motives and find moral explanations for feelings and actions that in reality have a non-moral origin.
We use the term "oversocialized" to describe such people. Ovcrsocializalion can lend to low self-esteem, a sense of powerlcssness, defeatism, guilt, etc.
One of the most important means by which our society socializes children is by making them feci ashamed of behavior or speech that is contrary to society's expectations. If this is over- done, or if a particular child is especially susceptible to such feelings, he ends by feeling ashamed of himself. Moreover the thought and the behavior of the ovcrsocializcd person arc more restricted by society's expectations than are those of the lightly socialized person.
The majority of people engage in a significant amount of naughty behavior. They lie, they commit petty thefts, they break traffic laws, they goof off at work, they hale someone, they say spite- ful tilings or they use some underhanded trick to get ahead olthc other guy. The ovei socialized person cannot do these things, or if he docs do them he generates in himscirn sense of shame and self-hatred.
The ovcrsocializcd person cannot even experience, without guilt, thoughts or feelings that are contrary to the accepted morality; he cannot think "unclean" ihoughls. And socialization is not just a matter of morality; wc are socialized to confirm to many norms of behavior that do not fall under the heading of morality.
Thus the ovcrsocializcd person is kept on a psychological leash and spends his life running on rails that society has laid down for him. In many oversocializcd people this results in a sense of constraint and powerlcssness that can be a severe hardship. We suggest that ovcrsocializalion is among the more serious cruelties that human beings inflict on one another, Wc argue that a very important and influential segment of the modern left is oversocializcd and that their ovcrsocializalion is of great importance in determining the direction of modem leftism.
Leftists of the oversocialized type tend to be intellectuals or members of the upper- middle class. Notice that university intellectuals 1 constitute the most highly socialized seg- ment or our society and also the most left-wing segment. The leftist of the oversocializcd type tries to gel off bis psychological leash and assert his autonomy by rebelling. But usually lie is nol strong enough to rebel against the most basic values of society. Generally speaking, the goals of today's leftists arc not in conflict 1 with the accepted morality.
On the contrary, the left lakes an accepted moral principle, adopts it as its own, and then accuses mainstream society of violating that principle. More fundamentally, the duly oflhe indi- vidual to serve society and the duty of society to take care of the individual.
These values are explicitly or implicitly expressed or presupposed in most of the inate- 2. Paragraph 25 During the Victorian period many oversocialized people suffered from Striata psychologi- cal problems at a result of repressing or trying to repress llteir sexual feelings, Freud apparently based his theories on people of this type. Today the focus of socialization has shifted f torn sex to aggression. Paragraph 27J Not necessarily including specialists in engineering "hard" sciences.
This is "political correctness. They will use it to oppress everyone else if they ever gel it under their own control. In earlier revolutions, leftists oflhe most power-hungry type, repeatedly, have first cooper- ated with non-leftist revolutionaries, as well as with leftists of a more libertarian inclination, and later have double-crossed them to seize power for themselves. Robespierre did this in the French Revolution, the Bolsheviks did it in the Russian Revolution, the communists did it in Spain in and Castro and his followers did it in Cuba.
Given the past history of leftism, it would be utterly foolish for non-leftist revolutionaries today to collaborate with leftists. Various thinkers have pointed out that leftism is a kind of religion. Leftism is nol a religion in the strict sense because leftist doctrine docs not postulate the existence of any supernatural hcing.
But for the leftist, leftism plays a psychological role much like that which religion plays for some people.
The leftist needs to believe in leftism; it plays a vital role in his psy- chological economy. His beliefs are not ensily modified by logic or facts. Me has a deep conviction that leftism is morally Right with a capital R. We use the term "leftism" because we don't know of any belter words to designate the spectrum of related creeds that includes the feminist, gay rights, pohticaf cor- rectness, clc, movements, and because these movements have a strong affinity with the old left.
Sec paragraphs Leftism is totalitarian force.
Wherever leftism is in a position of power it tends to invade every private corner and force every thought into a leftist mold. In pari this is because oflhe quasi-religious character of leftism; everything contrary lo leftists beliefs represents Sin. More i in porl ant ly. But no mailer how far the movement has gone in attaining its goals the leftist is never satisfied, because his activism is a surrogate activity see paragraph That is, the leftist's real motive is not to allntn the ostensible goals of leftism; in reality he is motivated by the sense of power he gets from struggling for and then reaching a social goal.
The leftist wants equal oppor- tunities for minorities. When that is attained he instsls on statistical equality of achievement by minorities. And as long as anyone harbors in some comer of his mind a negative attitude toward some minority, the leftist has to reeducate him. And ethnic minorities are not enough; no one can be allowed to have a negative altitude toward homosexuals, disabled people, fat people, old people, ugly people, and on and on and on. It's not enough that the public should be informed about the hazards of smoking; a warning has to be stamped on every package of cigarcltcs.
Then cigarette advertising has lo be restricted if not banned.