Was the Unabomber Right
video description
Date: 2024-08-01
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 20
whatifalthist
I was with you up till you started talking about histoy. You made a presumption about the world, then twisted history to match your presuposition, resulting in hilarious mental gymnastics like saying serfdom was a good thing actually, and most laughable of all, that older forms of governments were weaker than modern government. Technologically limited, sure. Can't spy on cell phones before phones were invented. But that doesn't mean they wouldn't.
Listen to yourself.
I think Tedd was alot smarter than you, and made a much more coherant point without warping history to agree with him.
Your central point can still stand separately from the moral justification you are trying to construct around it.
I industrial society can be bad, without advocating tribalism, cast system, or monarchy.
Material wealth isn't just about having the shiniest SUV on the block, or more bathrooms in your house, it's the ability to do something other than work to death.
Industry isn't the reason people work 40-60 hours a weak away from their kids without any meaning; poverty and greed are why they work.
There are plenty of people, who are able to balance work and life, and having achieved their immediate needs, no longer need to work excessive hours or work a dead end job they hate.
The other people you are presenting as the model of a modern man, are either too poor to afford the luxary of hobbies or a family, or are so mentally ill, they choose to live beyond thier means because of a combination of mental problems that make Tedd look sane.
Industry gave us the middle class, globalism gave us the underclass.
3rd worlders WISH they had air-conditioning. There is a reason people left thier family farms to go lose thier fingers in a milling machine: the factory oftered then a chance at a better life, the farm offered them nothing more than what they already had.
You'd be dead at middle age if it wasn't for all the greedy humans who decided life wasn't good enough for them.
What has gone wrong, is that industry is no longer uplifting people. We peaking in the 1950s, and are now slipping BACKWARDS toward the serfdom you pretend was somehow more idealic than modern life. The 3rd world are the dead weight draggging wages down, and sinking our economy down to thier midevil level. The people who actually live the way you suggest, are piling onto rafts and hiking through deserts to escape your version of an ideal world, and abandoning thier families in warzones and poverty to do it.
It isn't societies fault, society is nothing but common expressions. Society is a simple organism. It has no mind to think with, it has no will. It is no more human than the buerocrocies we built.
Society is a machine just like us, it exists merely to perpetuate itself. And this selfish urge to live is what drove us to this point, and will continue to drive us forward till we die.
You can reminisce about how great Polio is all you want, but no one wants to plow thier lord's fields till they die at age 30; anymore than they want to screw the same bolt onto the same bumper for 30 years.
reply
I was with you up till you started talking about histoy. You made a presumption about the world, then twisted history to match your presuposition, resulting in hilarious mental gymnastics like saying serfdom was a good thing actually, and most laughable of all, that older forms of governments were weaker than modern government. Technologically limited, sure. Can't spy on cell phones before phones were invented. But that doesn't mean they wouldn't.
Listen to yourself.
I think Tedd was alot smarter than you, and made a much more coherant point without warping history to agree with him.
Your central point can still stand separately from the moral justification you are trying to construct around it.
I industrial society can be bad, without advocating tribalism, cast system, or monarchy.
Material wealth isn't just about having the shiniest SUV on the block, or more bathrooms in your house, it's the ability to do something other than work to death.
Industry isn't the reason people work 40-60 hours a weak away from their kids without any meaning; poverty and greed are why they work.
There are plenty of people, who are able to balance work and life, and having achieved their immediate needs, no longer need to work excessive hours or work a dead end job they hate.
The other people you are presenting as the model of a modern man, are either too poor to afford the luxary of hobbies or a family, or are so mentally ill, they choose to live beyond thier means because of a combination of mental problems that make Tedd look sane.
Industry gave us the middle class, globalism gave us the underclass.
3rd worlders WISH they had air-conditioning. There is a reason people left thier family farms to go lose thier fingers in a milling machine: the factory oftered then a chance at a better life, the farm offered them nothing more than what they already had.
You'd be dead at middle age if it wasn't for all the greedy humans who decided life wasn't good enough for them.
What has gone wrong, is that industry is no longer uplifting people. We peaking in the 1950s, and are now slipping BACKWARDS toward the serfdom you pretend was somehow more idealic than modern life. The 3rd world are the dead weight draggging wages down, and sinking our economy down to thier midevil level. The people who actually live the way you suggest, are piling onto rafts and hiking through deserts to escape your version of an ideal world, and abandoning thier families in warzones and poverty to do it.
It isn't societies fault, society is nothing but common expressions. Society is a simple organism. It has no mind to think with, it has no will. It is no more human than the buerocrocies we built.
Society is a machine just like us, it exists merely to perpetuate itself. And this selfish urge to live is what drove us to this point, and will continue to drive us forward till we die.
You can reminisce about how great Polio is all you want, but no one wants to plow thier lord's fields till they die at age 30; anymore than they want to screw the same bolt onto the same bumper for 30 years.
reply
Aproppo
Splendid and thought provoking video. I had many of these same thoughts throughout my years growing up- And many of the same worries rose up, even before taking a look at Kaczynski's manifesto. You exemplified modern society perfectly, in a way that I wouldn't be able to articulate. I think many of the reasons so many people end up with mental issues today is because modern society does not allow different people to fit in easily; Cogs are preffered. Neurodivergence is something that would naturally just end up a weird quirk of personality in old society while today it becomes a debilitating factor for some nowadays; Makes people un-employable or undesired and there is little outlet for that.
I think in some part the socialist ideas stem from that desire to maintain community but people have gone through the education system brainwashed into supporting mutated and deformed versions of it, and by that I mean what socialism could be resolved through would be greater communal living like with your extended family. I think your mention of large amounts of people being self-employed in olden days is only partially true though, as it often came to differ between time periods and depends on whether people working together on a farm with multiple families ends up with only one keeping the bulk of the profits as the clan chief or whatnot. But, those clans would still often support eachother more through difficult times but also only to a certain degree. We know full well that children that struggled in old times would not be kept alive for long in most societies as the struggle through winter or other difficulties made it unfeasible. I did go on a bit of a tangent, but I only wonder if it would be possible for society to mold modern values with older systems of living since there are so many barriers in front of that goal.
As this world moves forward and society becomes more expensive to participate in, the political developments that emerge will become only worse as the status quo is clearly not working whilst a centrist approach would only maintain it. I've experienced a 30% or more hike on prices over the last year and a half in the vast majority of goods and services making the mere act of surviving a chore. Having a moderately comfortable life is exceedingly difficult and only incentivizes one to extremes. A difficult story is forming, that's all that I can witness- Surely, I can't predict much more with the times becoming ever more turbulent, I just wish to enjoy the good times and not only the bad ones.
reply
Splendid and thought provoking video. I had many of these same thoughts throughout my years growing up- And many of the same worries rose up, even before taking a look at Kaczynski's manifesto. You exemplified modern society perfectly, in a way that I wouldn't be able to articulate. I think many of the reasons so many people end up with mental issues today is because modern society does not allow different people to fit in easily; Cogs are preffered. Neurodivergence is something that would naturally just end up a weird quirk of personality in old society while today it becomes a debilitating factor for some nowadays; Makes people un-employable or undesired and there is little outlet for that.
I think in some part the socialist ideas stem from that desire to maintain community but people have gone through the education system brainwashed into supporting mutated and deformed versions of it, and by that I mean what socialism could be resolved through would be greater communal living like with your extended family. I think your mention of large amounts of people being self-employed in olden days is only partially true though, as it often came to differ between time periods and depends on whether people working together on a farm with multiple families ends up with only one keeping the bulk of the profits as the clan chief or whatnot. But, those clans would still often support eachother more through difficult times but also only to a certain degree. We know full well that children that struggled in old times would not be kept alive for long in most societies as the struggle through winter or other difficulties made it unfeasible. I did go on a bit of a tangent, but I only wonder if it would be possible for society to mold modern values with older systems of living since there are so many barriers in front of that goal.
As this world moves forward and society becomes more expensive to participate in, the political developments that emerge will become only worse as the status quo is clearly not working whilst a centrist approach would only maintain it. I've experienced a 30% or more hike on prices over the last year and a half in the vast majority of goods and services making the mere act of surviving a chore. Having a moderately comfortable life is exceedingly difficult and only incentivizes one to extremes. A difficult story is forming, that's all that I can witness- Surely, I can't predict much more with the times becoming ever more turbulent, I just wish to enjoy the good times and not only the bad ones.
reply
meatybtz
Lets take a moment to talk about farming. Corporate farming today is corporate welfare. That is, farm subsidies are direct corporate welfare. You see, we over produce. EVERYTHING. The government buys up the surplus to prop up the market price. But The USA alone, produces enough wheat, rice, and corn to literally, feed nearly 10B people. on it's own. Let that sink in. We are told we need corporate farming to feed the society at this scale. That we need GMO to increase production rates. That we need to drive the very dirt into a toxic state where the wheat you eat has absorbed these built up toxic byproducts from mass industrial attempts to over farm. Even that side, the land is so depleted by all of this farming that today's produce has 25% or more fewer primary nutrients. The thing is, if the government stopped paying these mega-corps to over farm, the price would crash, they'd go out of business. And so they wave the panic flag. we will starve w/o the corporations! We will pay HUGE prices for FOOD! The answer is in fact the opposite. We over produce so much that the price would be nothing. Our methods, are means, are so advanced that small family farms could make enough to feed multiple countries, w/o over farming. just in the USA. Enough that even if the government stopped buying up the surplus to prop up pricing. it still wouldn't crash. and it still wouldn't even be a fraction of what it costs today. There is a food lie and it's killing the land. and killing you. for nothing more than easy profit directly off the biggest feed source. the US Government. The US Government buys up so much excess that is produced that they can't even transport even a fraction to places in need. it's just so much that it is just left to rot, something like 20% of our total grains are bought and left to rot.
You don't need the corporation, nor a big government. But it's interested only in it's own existence and will do anything to keep it that way. Kill you, poison you, you don't matter. It is the ultimate narcissistic machine, only it's own existence in the now matters. It doesn't plan for the future.
You don't need corporate farms. You don't need imported labor. You don't need any of that nonsense. But they are desperate to make you believe that you do.
reply
Lets take a moment to talk about farming. Corporate farming today is corporate welfare. That is, farm subsidies are direct corporate welfare. You see, we over produce. EVERYTHING. The government buys up the surplus to prop up the market price. But The USA alone, produces enough wheat, rice, and corn to literally, feed nearly 10B people. on it's own. Let that sink in. We are told we need corporate farming to feed the society at this scale. That we need GMO to increase production rates. That we need to drive the very dirt into a toxic state where the wheat you eat has absorbed these built up toxic byproducts from mass industrial attempts to over farm. Even that side, the land is so depleted by all of this farming that today's produce has 25% or more fewer primary nutrients. The thing is, if the government stopped paying these mega-corps to over farm, the price would crash, they'd go out of business. And so they wave the panic flag. we will starve w/o the corporations! We will pay HUGE prices for FOOD! The answer is in fact the opposite. We over produce so much that the price would be nothing. Our methods, are means, are so advanced that small family farms could make enough to feed multiple countries, w/o over farming. just in the USA. Enough that even if the government stopped buying up the surplus to prop up pricing. it still wouldn't crash. and it still wouldn't even be a fraction of what it costs today. There is a food lie and it's killing the land. and killing you. for nothing more than easy profit directly off the biggest feed source. the US Government. The US Government buys up so much excess that is produced that they can't even transport even a fraction to places in need. it's just so much that it is just left to rot, something like 20% of our total grains are bought and left to rot.
You don't need the corporation, nor a big government. But it's interested only in it's own existence and will do anything to keep it that way. Kill you, poison you, you don't matter. It is the ultimate narcissistic machine, only it's own existence in the now matters. It doesn't plan for the future.
You don't need corporate farms. You don't need imported labor. You don't need any of that nonsense. But they are desperate to make you believe that you do.
reply
dg-ov4cf
You're really grasping at straws to find silver linings in the brutality of pre-industrial life. This video's portrayal would have you believe that despite the hardship, medieval peasants somehow managed to carry out happy, fulfilled, self-actualized lives, when in reality 99% of society was hopelessly stuck at the bottom level of Mazlow's pyramid for the entirety of their brief time on earth. A peasants' idea of happy was not dying of tuberculosis before the age of 15, or having just enough family members survive a famine to be able to keep the farm running. The cruel irony was that such a family-centered world was filled with so much loss and tragedy. I guess you can romanticize the idea of going up against the perils of nature alongside your family, being in it together in a world where everyone's lives hung by a string etc, but you've been playing too many video games if you'd rather experience the unimaginable nightmare of your whole family suddenly dying in a plague than deal with a little emotional emptiness. Also, everyone makes a big deal about Idiocracy becoming reality, but it has been (and in many places, still is) the default intellectual landscape of society. People like Rudyard who are naturally intellectually curious, open-minded and outspoken critical thinkers would almost certainly either (A) never have developed those character traits (with a healthy learned helplessness taking their place, or (B) die in a barbaric kafkaesque nightmare as society squashed you like a bug and made an example out of your heresy
reply
You're really grasping at straws to find silver linings in the brutality of pre-industrial life. This video's portrayal would have you believe that despite the hardship, medieval peasants somehow managed to carry out happy, fulfilled, self-actualized lives, when in reality 99% of society was hopelessly stuck at the bottom level of Mazlow's pyramid for the entirety of their brief time on earth. A peasants' idea of happy was not dying of tuberculosis before the age of 15, or having just enough family members survive a famine to be able to keep the farm running. The cruel irony was that such a family-centered world was filled with so much loss and tragedy. I guess you can romanticize the idea of going up against the perils of nature alongside your family, being in it together in a world where everyone's lives hung by a string etc, but you've been playing too many video games if you'd rather experience the unimaginable nightmare of your whole family suddenly dying in a plague than deal with a little emotional emptiness. Also, everyone makes a big deal about Idiocracy becoming reality, but it has been (and in many places, still is) the default intellectual landscape of society. People like Rudyard who are naturally intellectually curious, open-minded and outspoken critical thinkers would almost certainly either (A) never have developed those character traits (with a healthy learned helplessness taking their place, or (B) die in a barbaric kafkaesque nightmare as society squashed you like a bug and made an example out of your heresy
reply
MmntechCa
Lao Tzu, writing in the 4th century BC, said one can't rule the world, since doing so would put you in opposition to the Dao. To grossly simplify things, the Dao is nature. I think Lao Tzu (or whoever wrote the Tao Te Ching) understood that nature, which humans are a part of, is an inherently chaotic system. Yet it's a system that's also inherently self-governing. You make things worse/more difficult for yourself by trying to control that. Yet the overarching goal of our industry world is the attempt not just to control nature, but completely subvert it. This is why everything feels like it's going off the rails, and has for the last 150 years. I think it's possible that society can find a balance point. Where we can enjoy the benefits of modernity while minimizing the drawbacks, and bringing us closer in line with nature/Dao/flow. But that will involve confronting a lot of difficult questions, where everything has to be on the table. And I just don't think we're mature enough to even have that discussion. Uncle Ted seemed to think it was already too late some 30 years ago.
reply
Lao Tzu, writing in the 4th century BC, said one can't rule the world, since doing so would put you in opposition to the Dao. To grossly simplify things, the Dao is nature. I think Lao Tzu (or whoever wrote the Tao Te Ching) understood that nature, which humans are a part of, is an inherently chaotic system. Yet it's a system that's also inherently self-governing. You make things worse/more difficult for yourself by trying to control that. Yet the overarching goal of our industry world is the attempt not just to control nature, but completely subvert it. This is why everything feels like it's going off the rails, and has for the last 150 years. I think it's possible that society can find a balance point. Where we can enjoy the benefits of modernity while minimizing the drawbacks, and bringing us closer in line with nature/Dao/flow. But that will involve confronting a lot of difficult questions, where everything has to be on the table. And I just don't think we're mature enough to even have that discussion. Uncle Ted seemed to think it was already too late some 30 years ago.
reply
spiderlime
as someone whose family was influenced by the holocaust about three generations ago, i'n deeply troubled by this strange longing, on both sides of the political map, for an existential reality in which the individual would willingly give up personal liberties and be governed either by a group, an institution, or an individual. the politically correct left is creating a repressive intellectual infrastructure based on censorship and a paradoxical reversal of inclusion into a form of exclusion: you can no longer set personal boundaries and know yourself in any tru sense, since tha would make you an ist or a phobe. knowledge is bound to censorship. the right nowadays operates along similar lines, and knowledge is restricted to the creation of financial profit. no political system or educational system in history truly promoted the instillation of the love of knowledge and universal morality in indiduals. the sad part of all this is that the same patterns still exist: humanity prefers to remain in the dark. society is sick because the system promotes ignorance.
reply
as someone whose family was influenced by the holocaust about three generations ago, i'n deeply troubled by this strange longing, on both sides of the political map, for an existential reality in which the individual would willingly give up personal liberties and be governed either by a group, an institution, or an individual. the politically correct left is creating a repressive intellectual infrastructure based on censorship and a paradoxical reversal of inclusion into a form of exclusion: you can no longer set personal boundaries and know yourself in any tru sense, since tha would make you an ist or a phobe. knowledge is bound to censorship. the right nowadays operates along similar lines, and knowledge is restricted to the creation of financial profit. no political system or educational system in history truly promoted the instillation of the love of knowledge and universal morality in indiduals. the sad part of all this is that the same patterns still exist: humanity prefers to remain in the dark. society is sick because the system promotes ignorance.
reply
skilltreebusybee
Good stuff love the devil's advocate aprochs
First me and my brother have schizophrenia but we tethered are reality to reality in that upon schizophrenia on set we decide to relearn all of science and philosophy during are schizophrenia with the awareness that leaning in to reality would keep us tethered to reality and it worked.
As far as the left goes the far side of both political views are completely Mad.
As far as mental health issues and civil collapse that's a byproduct of the cemical and ecological byproduct industrial manufacturing.
You can link biological differences and expressions to Endocrin disrupting cemicals that aplys to dyes lether taning metel working and petroleum byproduct as well as meny agricultural products. You have to look in to multi generational epigenetic effects Endocrin disrupting cemicals through the lends of the kinda cellular atomaton model where diversity in development issues are expressions of compounding exposure factors to understand but it's there
reply
Good stuff love the devil's advocate aprochs
First me and my brother have schizophrenia but we tethered are reality to reality in that upon schizophrenia on set we decide to relearn all of science and philosophy during are schizophrenia with the awareness that leaning in to reality would keep us tethered to reality and it worked.
As far as the left goes the far side of both political views are completely Mad.
As far as mental health issues and civil collapse that's a byproduct of the cemical and ecological byproduct industrial manufacturing.
You can link biological differences and expressions to Endocrin disrupting cemicals that aplys to dyes lether taning metel working and petroleum byproduct as well as meny agricultural products. You have to look in to multi generational epigenetic effects Endocrin disrupting cemicals through the lends of the kinda cellular atomaton model where diversity in development issues are expressions of compounding exposure factors to understand but it's there
reply
graveyardshift6691
No. He wasn't.
Was he right about how people are using and leveraging technology Yes.
But his answer was to blow us all to the Stone Age and keep us locked there. No progress. Only static conditions.
This is actually the concept explored by Dr. Stone. Tsukasa tries to kill Senku and does his level best to eradicate any sense of scientific progression in the hopes of keeping the world 'pure' for the children.
What Tsukasa failed to realize is that even if he'd managed to kill Senku, there would always be a Chrome. Someone just far too interested in the natural world and enthralled by natural phenomena they'd try to work out how to replicate it so they could share it with others. Science, like life, ALWAYS finds a way.
This is what the luddites like Ted keep forgetting in their bid to take us back in time to a 'better world'.
Still doesn't mean I agree with progress for progress sake. It needs to be unveiled at a pace the world can absorb. Slowly.
reply
No. He wasn't.
Was he right about how people are using and leveraging technology Yes.
But his answer was to blow us all to the Stone Age and keep us locked there. No progress. Only static conditions.
This is actually the concept explored by Dr. Stone. Tsukasa tries to kill Senku and does his level best to eradicate any sense of scientific progression in the hopes of keeping the world 'pure' for the children.
What Tsukasa failed to realize is that even if he'd managed to kill Senku, there would always be a Chrome. Someone just far too interested in the natural world and enthralled by natural phenomena they'd try to work out how to replicate it so they could share it with others. Science, like life, ALWAYS finds a way.
This is what the luddites like Ted keep forgetting in their bid to take us back in time to a 'better world'.
Still doesn't mean I agree with progress for progress sake. It needs to be unveiled at a pace the world can absorb. Slowly.
reply
Cristov123
One thing I've always found interesting, is the demonstration of the burden of intelligence with this case. Every person I meet who's an obvious low IQ, is blissfully ignorant of everything around them. Intelligent people, like myeslf(I'm no 160 IQ, but I'm a step above the average mouth breather) understand what's actually happening. Intelligent people aren't so easily taken in by the illusions created to pacify them.
It's kind of a horrific burden, to understand the mess you're actually living in, and to realize that despite your understanding of it you're virtually powerless to effect it. I imagine that played no small role in unhinging ol' Ted, it's enough to drive me nearly bonkers as well. There are many days where I find myself envious of the average dullard, and their ability to just coast through life totally unaware of the nightmarish hellscape surrounding them. I think intellect comes with a substantial cost, and knowledge can be a horrific burden to bear.
reply
One thing I've always found interesting, is the demonstration of the burden of intelligence with this case. Every person I meet who's an obvious low IQ, is blissfully ignorant of everything around them. Intelligent people, like myeslf(I'm no 160 IQ, but I'm a step above the average mouth breather) understand what's actually happening. Intelligent people aren't so easily taken in by the illusions created to pacify them.
It's kind of a horrific burden, to understand the mess you're actually living in, and to realize that despite your understanding of it you're virtually powerless to effect it. I imagine that played no small role in unhinging ol' Ted, it's enough to drive me nearly bonkers as well. There are many days where I find myself envious of the average dullard, and their ability to just coast through life totally unaware of the nightmarish hellscape surrounding them. I think intellect comes with a substantial cost, and knowledge can be a horrific burden to bear.
reply
UniversalistSon9
We unknowingly live in a state of voluntary cooperation, where individuals self-organize and interact without the need for authoritarian oversight. This innate human capacity for mutual aid and cooperation undermines the notion that we require centralized power structures to maintain social order. The symbolic nature of money, borders, and authority reveals that our perceptions of reality are shaped by collective beliefs and social norms. By recognizing the illusory nature of these constructs, we can transcend the limitations of our agreed upon dreams and move towards a more authentic, equitable, and free society. In this paradigm, individuals can thrive without the constraints of artificial scarcity, borders, and hierarchical power structures, instead embracing a world of abundance, cooperation, and voluntary exchange.
reply
We unknowingly live in a state of voluntary cooperation, where individuals self-organize and interact without the need for authoritarian oversight. This innate human capacity for mutual aid and cooperation undermines the notion that we require centralized power structures to maintain social order. The symbolic nature of money, borders, and authority reveals that our perceptions of reality are shaped by collective beliefs and social norms. By recognizing the illusory nature of these constructs, we can transcend the limitations of our agreed upon dreams and move towards a more authentic, equitable, and free society. In this paradigm, individuals can thrive without the constraints of artificial scarcity, borders, and hierarchical power structures, instead embracing a world of abundance, cooperation, and voluntary exchange.
reply
alexhubble
Righto, I am relieved, you have seen some problems with Mr Kacynski. Was he right No. Was he mad Hmmmm. I worked in a probation office in the UK. All court psych reports begin Mr X arrived on time, was well presented and appeared oriented in time and space Clearly Kacynski was oriented in time and space. But where his beliefs would take us is a make-believe agrarian uptopia, on a road paved with 6 billion corpses. So, a bit mad.
Society has problems. But these are not solved by retreat to the land. Rural poverty is and always has been shit. The shittest. Pre and early modern London was a literal death trap. Far more people died there than were born. But the population grew because people flooded in from the countryside. In a town, with more connectivity, there's at least a chance.
reply
Righto, I am relieved, you have seen some problems with Mr Kacynski. Was he right No. Was he mad Hmmmm. I worked in a probation office in the UK. All court psych reports begin Mr X arrived on time, was well presented and appeared oriented in time and space Clearly Kacynski was oriented in time and space. But where his beliefs would take us is a make-believe agrarian uptopia, on a road paved with 6 billion corpses. So, a bit mad.
Society has problems. But these are not solved by retreat to the land. Rural poverty is and always has been shit. The shittest. Pre and early modern London was a literal death trap. Far more people died there than were born. But the population grew because people flooded in from the countryside. In a town, with more connectivity, there's at least a chance.
reply
daedalus666
Ted was utterly wrong. Everything that goes well in our lives goes well thanks to an industrial process; food, water, heat, electricity and so on. On the other hand, everything depressing and disappointing in our lives is related to the human element. Men and women can't tolerate each other because most men are undesirable to women for reasons that are entirely natural (the asymmetry in minimal parental investment leads females to be choosier. Families break apart for reasons that are entirely natural (competition over allocation of resources. Human psychology is severely dysfunctional and incompatible with happiness. There will come a point were we will be able to industrially reengineer the human psyche for the best.
reply
Ted was utterly wrong. Everything that goes well in our lives goes well thanks to an industrial process; food, water, heat, electricity and so on. On the other hand, everything depressing and disappointing in our lives is related to the human element. Men and women can't tolerate each other because most men are undesirable to women for reasons that are entirely natural (the asymmetry in minimal parental investment leads females to be choosier. Families break apart for reasons that are entirely natural (competition over allocation of resources. Human psychology is severely dysfunctional and incompatible with happiness. There will come a point were we will be able to industrially reengineer the human psyche for the best.
reply
coryernewein
Ford understood the marvel of mechanization and the benefits they could provide. He standardized the 5 day work week and 8 hour days, he knew what was promised by the industrial revolution and followed through, thus allowing more time to be had with family while still accomplishing a great deal more than was possible purely by hand.
Somehow, somewhere the spirit of WE MUST MAKE MORE crept in to society. We were told you could plow all 3 fields in a day, and have them planted equally as easy. Thus allowing for more time to do tasks you wanted or needed to do, instead we are now told wow, you finished already. Guess you better go make more widgets to placate society.
reply
Ford understood the marvel of mechanization and the benefits they could provide. He standardized the 5 day work week and 8 hour days, he knew what was promised by the industrial revolution and followed through, thus allowing more time to be had with family while still accomplishing a great deal more than was possible purely by hand.
Somehow, somewhere the spirit of WE MUST MAKE MORE crept in to society. We were told you could plow all 3 fields in a day, and have them planted equally as easy. Thus allowing for more time to do tasks you wanted or needed to do, instead we are now told wow, you finished already. Guess you better go make more widgets to placate society.
reply
Unknowngnostic
While he was right about where we were going, his solution caused damage to the ideas and set us back. Because anyone hesitant of modernity can be labeled as a sympathizer. Violence can never be the answer to a meaningful social objection. It will always do more harm for the cause. Thats always been the worst part of the issue of him being a genius. How could he not see the damage his actions would cause Especially innocent lives if ppl who just want to provide for their families. You dont win the hearts and minds of ppl that way. And any movement needs to win the hearts and mindss of the ppl
reply
While he was right about where we were going, his solution caused damage to the ideas and set us back. Because anyone hesitant of modernity can be labeled as a sympathizer. Violence can never be the answer to a meaningful social objection. It will always do more harm for the cause. Thats always been the worst part of the issue of him being a genius. How could he not see the damage his actions would cause Especially innocent lives if ppl who just want to provide for their families. You dont win the hearts and minds of ppl that way. And any movement needs to win the hearts and mindss of the ppl
reply
TomJones-op9nj
You guys are paranoid. It’s not like I can tell my posts are often being viewed in real time. . Hell if you looked at all the right wing stuff AND gun shit I have watchedof course I am on a listDon’t use guys know anything. The President AND the director of the FBI have both identified white wing extremists (yes it was intentional. duh) as the most dangerous terror threat facing this country. holy shit THATS ME! . Shit. I thought I was a reasonably intelligent moderate conservative with a non threatening level of patriotism.
Turned out. I am literally a demon from hell. huh. go figure
reply
You guys are paranoid. It’s not like I can tell my posts are often being viewed in real time. . Hell if you looked at all the right wing stuff AND gun shit I have watchedof course I am on a listDon’t use guys know anything. The President AND the director of the FBI have both identified white wing extremists (yes it was intentional. duh) as the most dangerous terror threat facing this country. holy shit THATS ME! . Shit. I thought I was a reasonably intelligent moderate conservative with a non threatening level of patriotism.
Turned out. I am literally a demon from hell. huh. go figure
reply
StarCityFAME
Not to glamorize the Unibomber, which is a mistake to do, but I think of the migrant workers in my area who come to the grocery store every week with their wives and kids and their fistful of 100 dollar bills, and have money left over to send to their relatives in Latin America so they can buy that nice house for cash and eventually go home and enjoy it with them.
What's stopping Americans from this kind of resolve I have heard a quote from someone recently. Being poor is hard. Getting ahead is hard. Choose your hard. Indeed.
reply
Not to glamorize the Unibomber, which is a mistake to do, but I think of the migrant workers in my area who come to the grocery store every week with their wives and kids and their fistful of 100 dollar bills, and have money left over to send to their relatives in Latin America so they can buy that nice house for cash and eventually go home and enjoy it with them.
What's stopping Americans from this kind of resolve I have heard a quote from someone recently. Being poor is hard. Getting ahead is hard. Choose your hard. Indeed.
reply
Torus2112
Henry Murray, the psychologist who ran the experiment Kaczynski was a part of, should be viewed as one of the great black marks on the history of psychology. The experiment had to do with taking specifically very intelligent and talented individuals and traumatizing them; and what's more his work didn't even have any lasting impact on psychology, none of his work underpins anything being done in academic psychology today. His cruelty and incompetence resulted in a complete waste of precious human potential.
reply
Henry Murray, the psychologist who ran the experiment Kaczynski was a part of, should be viewed as one of the great black marks on the history of psychology. The experiment had to do with taking specifically very intelligent and talented individuals and traumatizing them; and what's more his work didn't even have any lasting impact on psychology, none of his work underpins anything being done in academic psychology today. His cruelty and incompetence resulted in a complete waste of precious human potential.
reply
adon2424
I am a technician and like technology and troubleshooting. For about 20 years now I have had an uneasy feeling about the internet. This documentary clarified the uneasy feeling. Oversocialization. Perhaps pronouns in use today are a consequence of oversocialization. People are using pronoun s as an avatar for the fake reality of the internet, social media and games. They think that is real life. That is feedback loop to all aspects of civilization.
reply
I am a technician and like technology and troubleshooting. For about 20 years now I have had an uneasy feeling about the internet. This documentary clarified the uneasy feeling. Oversocialization. Perhaps pronouns in use today are a consequence of oversocialization. People are using pronoun s as an avatar for the fake reality of the internet, social media and games. They think that is real life. That is feedback loop to all aspects of civilization.
reply
Byronjesk6004
Climate change is going to cause mass reduction in human population anyways. People on the left know this, and that is why SOME (not all) push for a return to a pre-industrial lifestyle. Others (including some on the right) push for technology to solve the issue, but it’s not clear that it will. What is clear, is that the stakes are high. In the history of the earth, the climate has never heated this quickly, and that should freak us all out.
reply
Climate change is going to cause mass reduction in human population anyways. People on the left know this, and that is why SOME (not all) push for a return to a pre-industrial lifestyle. Others (including some on the right) push for technology to solve the issue, but it’s not clear that it will. What is clear, is that the stakes are high. In the history of the earth, the climate has never heated this quickly, and that should freak us all out.
reply
Seeter1000
To simplify his ideas of going back to the stone age and the context i heard in the video and mixing my ideas of humanity. Our human civilization and genome will never develope to something better and greater, because we managed to removed adaptation in our genome and live comfy. We mix genes around that else would be restricted by darwinism/war and other factors. The way humanity works right now will probably make it to die out.
reply
To simplify his ideas of going back to the stone age and the context i heard in the video and mixing my ideas of humanity. Our human civilization and genome will never develope to something better and greater, because we managed to removed adaptation in our genome and live comfy. We mix genes around that else would be restricted by darwinism/war and other factors. The way humanity works right now will probably make it to die out.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
