Industrial Society and Its Future: Unabomber Manifesto
- Downloads：8338
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2022-10-18 09:53:46
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：Theodore J. Kaczynski
- ISBN：B086Y5JY5K
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
"It is important not to confuse freedom with mere permissiveness。"Theodore John Kaczynski （1942-） or also known as the Unabomber， is an Americandomestic terrorist and anarchist who moved to a remote cabin in 1971。 The cabin lackedelectricity or running water， there he lived as a recluse while learning how to be self-sufficient。 He began his bombing campaign in 1978 after witnessing the destruction ofthe wilderness surrounding his cabin。
Reviews
Dwayne Hicks
，
What will you do with the cognitive dissonance of seeing much merit to the Unabomber's worldview？ What will you do with the cognitive dissonance of seeing much merit to the Unabomber's worldview？ 。。。more
Clarice Piela
，
For someone that majorly enjoys fiction and fantasy i found this to be interesting！ Kaczynski’s formatting and being able to identify the flaws within industrial society and the effects it has on our own selves is eye opening。 I think reading this is more than worth it because it helps subvert the positive view on the industrial revolution that schools （at least mine） put onto us。I would rate this 5 stars but he did kill people and although he speaks of radical action being a part of the revolut For someone that majorly enjoys fiction and fantasy i found this to be interesting！ Kaczynski’s formatting and being able to identify the flaws within industrial society and the effects it has on our own selves is eye opening。 I think reading this is more than worth it because it helps subvert the positive view on the industrial revolution that schools （at least mine） put onto us。I would rate this 5 stars but he did kill people and although he speaks of radical action being a part of the revolution I still don’t like the idea of it。 Maybe this shows that I havent gotten the full message but I as a Catholic think that premature death is bad。 Also if i rate this 5 stars a suspicious van will be parked across the street of my house。 。。。more
Lohengramm
，
Brilliant manifesto。 One of the most scathing critiques of leftism and "the system" that exists。 Required reading for any serious dissident。 Really a great explanation of society's deepest ills。 Kaczynski's analysis is frighteningly accurate 27 years later。 When you read this， you would never imagine the man to be "insane" or irrational。 He is extremely rational， to a point that may upset some。 He understands that suffering is humanity's fate， though the worst fate of all is a totally controlled Brilliant manifesto。 One of the most scathing critiques of leftism and "the system" that exists。 Required reading for any serious dissident。 Really a great explanation of society's deepest ills。 Kaczynski's analysis is frighteningly accurate 27 years later。 When you read this， you would never imagine the man to be "insane" or irrational。 He is extremely rational， to a point that may upset some。 He understands that suffering is humanity's fate， though the worst fate of all is a totally controlled and engineered society without any purpose or meaning or connection to nature。 One cannot help but be frightened by the picture Kaczynski paints in this manifesto， that is， if they truly care about freedom and humanity。 。。。more
Not your bruh
，
Accurate
James F
，
Not particularly well put together or anything。 I had to read this for research in a class。 As you'd expect， it's a lot of madman's ramblings。 Not particularly well put together or anything。 I had to read this for research in a class。 As you'd expect， it's a lot of madman's ramblings。 。。。more
Ryan Klee
，
The rant of a mad man but surprisingly salient arguments for technology's impact on society （in the first half of the manifesto）。 Technology has evolved so quickly that people's needs are largely filled， and they find "surrogate activities。" People then find other things to find meaning in their lives。 I am sure he got this from other texts， not giving him full credit。His approach is crazy though， sending bombs to random academics。 And the second half of the text is unhinged and impractical。 Onc The rant of a mad man but surprisingly salient arguments for technology's impact on society （in the first half of the manifesto）。 Technology has evolved so quickly that people's needs are largely filled， and they find "surrogate activities。" People then find other things to find meaning in their lives。 I am sure he got this from other texts， not giving him full credit。His approach is crazy though， sending bombs to random academics。 And the second half of the text is unhinged and impractical。 Once people acquire a luxury， which in the next generation becomes a necessity， it's very hard to go back to living without it。 Electricity， climate control， the internet， Netflix。I would like my employer， the government and all those interested to know I only read this out of curiosity。 。。。more
Irene N
，
«Nuestra sociedad tiende a considerar como una ‘enfermedad’ cualquier forma de pensamiento o comportamiento que es inconveniente»«En esta etapa las máquinas poseerán el control efectivo。 La gente no podrá simplemente apagarlas， porque tendrán tal dependencia que desenchufarlas equivaldría al suicidio»«Visualizo un tiempo en el que seremos para los robots lo que los perros son para los humanos， y yo estoy apoyando a las máquinas» Shannon
Suki
，
this is a great book must read
Saint Android
，
This hits
Phillip Hardy
，
This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers。 To view it， click here。 I'm critical of Theodore's paragraph ordering; the first 30 paragraphs focus a lot on Leftism。 Those should be moved elsewhere。 The commentary and predictions are brilliant and I reference them often。 I'm critical of Theodore's paragraph ordering; the first 30 paragraphs focus a lot on Leftism。 Those should be moved elsewhere。 The commentary and predictions are brilliant and I reference them often。 。。。more
Ufuk
，
This book is one of the most horrible books I have ever read。 In my opinion it should not even have one star。 I can’t believe that this guy became a mathematics professor。 Being a mathemician means， that you back up your story with evidence。 That also applies to analyzing society and history。 It is obvious that Mr。 Kaczynski doesn’t know anything about history and uses all kinds of historical ‘data’ to prove himself right。In a way his work reminded me of Mein Kampf: a confusing mishmash of negat This book is one of the most horrible books I have ever read。 In my opinion it should not even have one star。 I can’t believe that this guy became a mathematics professor。 Being a mathemician means， that you back up your story with evidence。 That also applies to analyzing society and history。 It is obvious that Mr。 Kaczynski doesn’t know anything about history and uses all kinds of historical ‘data’ to prove himself right。In a way his work reminded me of Mein Kampf: a confusing mishmash of negative effects of industrial society （Hitler was also very anti-industrial society） mixed with rabid hate towards everything that is left or leftish。 If you are left it means you are a despicable human being。 To quote Kaczynski: “Self-hatred is a leftist trait” （paragraph 20。） Since they hate themselves they also want to make everyone’s life miserable。 He also rants against homosexuals， equal rights for women， anti-racism， multiculturism etc。After spending numerous pages on how horrible leftists are; what they do， whose interests they are trying to serve， how to recognize them， he says at the end “we can only advise the reader to use his own judgment in deciding who is a leftist” （paragraph 227。） So you shout and curse to “the LEFT” but you can not give us an idea who the leftists actually are…？ So you deliver the philosophical pooha and we mere mortals have to guess who they are…A good example of how horrible his knowledge of history is， is the fact that industrial societies today， because they are crowded， cause stress and aggression and that in the old rural societies long time ago such things were nonexistent。 Very false: in lots of rural / tribal societies we know that those were very aggressive and the chance that you could die by the hand of others， even in your own village was many times greater than today。 （Jared Diamond， Guns， germs and steel）。 This is just one of his big misconceptions。 （There are MANY in his work！）Of course the industrial society has lots of negative effects on lots of people but the problem is not the industry / modern society; it is how we cope with it as human beings and especially the government。 It is the MENTALITY that needs to change in order to create a more just society。 It is incredibly stupid to believe that we can do better by destroying every single industrial / modern organization / platform etc。 As we are with almost 8 billion people world wide we should be grateful that we have modern science: without it we would not have enough food。 Genetic modification （which he also condemns） saw to it that we have almost no crop failures。 We have better food also。 And yes， of course it is possible to use genetic modification for bad purposes but in order to achieve that you need to EDUCATE people not destroying the machinery which will be build up later again anyway。 （Something that Kaczynski himself also states。 That’s why we should also destroy all the manuals… LOL！） Kaczynski must be a great fan of James Cameron’s The Terminator because he thinks that machines are going to take over。 （“We only point out that the fate of the human race would be at the mercy of the machines”。 Paragraph 173）Mr。 Kaczynski is a confused man with a God complex。 The fact that he became a practicing terrorist might be a result of his train of thought。 I am happy he is in prison without a chance of him ever getting out。 Mr。 Kaczynski hates modern society with all it’s laws and freedoms （it is all LEFTIST！） but he is smart enough to use the system because his freedom of speech was “violated”。He should have listened to his lawyers and plead insanity because this guy is indeed insane。Reading this book is a waste of your time。 I read it completely because I wanted to see how insane he really is。 Very。。。 。。。more
Rodrigo Domínguez
，
3。5/5As many have said， this does not read like ramblings of a madman。 Kaczynski is very lucid and generally bright， with a style that shows he had thought seriously and rationally about these things。More important than his style or insights， though， is his subject matter。 It's my sincere belief that the question of technology is not visited enough from the left or the right。 At best， the problems of technological and economic growth are ignored （or dismissed as not the real problem， but a sympt 3。5/5As many have said， this does not read like ramblings of a madman。 Kaczynski is very lucid and generally bright， with a style that shows he had thought seriously and rationally about these things。More important than his style or insights， though， is his subject matter。 It's my sincere belief that the question of technology is not visited enough from the left or the right。 At best， the problems of technological and economic growth are ignored （or dismissed as not the real problem， but a symptom of some wrong political program）。 At worst， any rumination about their dangers is met with scoff and disdain。 Of course the fact that one of primitivism's major mainstraem exponents is also a convicted terrorist doesn't help the case that these ideas are serious and not fringe。Anyways， I found most of Kaczynski's diagnoses to be correct。 He cuts through the bullshit and states clearly the stakes of technological progress; the cost is our freedom， our very humanity。 While not particularily concerned with depth （Kaczynski does not draw an ontology like Heidegger does）， the book does deliver in terms of breadth: in a few pages Kaczynski covers history， psychology， economics， psychopharmaceuticals， ideology， advertisement， AI， bioengineering， and even has time to lay down strategic guidelines for revolutionary action。 His analysis of leftism is also spot on。But I have a big problem with this essay。 No， it's not the call for total collapse， though that too。 While （correctly） denouncing leftists and their tendency to over-simplify the world， Kaczynski seems comfortable enough putting all the blame on "the system"。 The industrial system， in the Unabomber's worldview， is an autonomous entity that demands technological control at the expense of human freedom， dignity， and happiness。 "The system" must therefore be destroyed and replaced by something more humane。 Spoken like a true Marxist。I'd say that this book's sin is being too optimistic: it ignores the role that humans and human nature play in creating， maintaining （and， in the event of total collapse， recreating） "the system"。 It sees that people are "forced" to adopt new technologies because of their convenience， and even acknowledges that many would not wish to have them taken away， but it does not locate the root of this desire。 Sure， propaganda and economic pressures play a role， but the real blackpill is that most people want this。 He almost seems to get it when he says: No code that reduced genetic engineering to a minor role could stand up for long， because the temptation presented by the immense power of biotechnology would be irresistible。 And where is the locus of this tempation？ Indeed， the reason that this does not seem like a serious conversation and its alternative feels so nightmarish to most is that many of us want comfort， want ease， want to be entertained， want things to go fast， want control， want predictibility， want longevity， want safety， and want to have more than we need。 Of course we don't know/understand/accept that most of these desires are anthitecal to human happiness and fulfillment。 But that is our Fallen nature and no revolution is likely to change that。Towards the end of the book， there's a couple of paragraphs which try to give an answer to this question。 When presented by the inevitable challenge of technology making a comeback after being "destroyed" （"。。。there will be many people who will be anxious to get the factories running again"）， Kaczynski rebukes:The enthusiasm for "progress" is a phenomenon peculiar to the modern form of society。。。No one knows why Europe became dynamic [in the late Middle Ages]。。。At any rate， it is clear that rapid development toward a technological form of society occurs only under special conditions。 What special conditions， Mr。 Kaczynski？ And what is the "ideology" you will use to counter the ever-lurking Promethean impulse？ That would make for an amazing sequel。 。。。more
Olanrewaju Olamide
，
The author thinks that freedom is good， just because。 From that assumption， he proceeds to make a beautiful argument for the eradication of technology。 But if the fundamental axiom of freedom being good in and of itself is false， then the entire argument falls flat on its face。 I mean， destroy technology and take us back to preindustrial society？ That is， society before the Industrial revolution -- society with slavery， disease， famine， and war。 I don't think so。 The author thinks that freedom is good， just because。 From that assumption， he proceeds to make a beautiful argument for the eradication of technology。 But if the fundamental axiom of freedom being good in and of itself is false， then the entire argument falls flat on its face。 I mean， destroy technology and take us back to preindustrial society？ That is， society before the Industrial revolution -- society with slavery， disease， famine， and war。 I don't think so。 。。。more
Chandler Juego
，
Disagree with one of his main points that we have lost fulfillment because we have lost autonomy over our survival （something along those lines， idk， it's 12 am when I am writing this）。 We have moved far too past this point in nature to consider redoing the system to fit this assumption。 Anyways， it's well-written and makes interesting points--just be wary of some of the assumptions he bases his main ideas on。 On a related note， here's a quote somewhat related to this reading whose sentiment I a Disagree with one of his main points that we have lost fulfillment because we have lost autonomy over our survival （something along those lines， idk， it's 12 am when I am writing this）。 We have moved far too past this point in nature to consider redoing the system to fit this assumption。 Anyways， it's well-written and makes interesting points--just be wary of some of the assumptions he bases his main ideas on。 On a related note， here's a quote somewhat related to this reading whose sentiment I agree with:“The whole planetary ecosystem is as much of an artifact， now， as … a city’s microclimate。 Believe me， I wish that wasn’t the case， but it is – and now that we’ve created an artificial world， intentionally or not， we’d better learn to control it。 Because if we stand back and leave it all to chance， it’s just going to collapse around us in some random fashion that isn’t likely to be any better than our worst well-intentioned mistakes。”– Greg Egan， Permutation City 。。。more
Bedtime4Bonzo
，
4/10。 Lame prose for a lame ideology that is just an incel-ified version of Marx's theory of alienation。 There's some salvageable ideas but nothing much beyond that。 4/10。 Lame prose for a lame ideology that is just an incel-ified version of Marx's theory of alienation。 There's some salvageable ideas but nothing much beyond that。 。。。more
Nathan Fowler
，
For legal reasons I disavow everything in this book
Nedas Sarmanauskas
，
A contraversial book to say the least， written by Theodore J。 Kaczynski is an essay about the industrial society。 As a fan of true crime， i love delving into the minds of the killers rather than just their actions。 I was expecting the paranoid ramblings of a madman， illuminati this， big brother that。 However， in actuality， i found myself not only understanding， but， in part， relating to the main message of the book， if only partly。 I believe Theodore is correct about the collosal impact technolo A contraversial book to say the least， written by Theodore J。 Kaczynski is an essay about the industrial society。 As a fan of true crime， i love delving into the minds of the killers rather than just their actions。 I was expecting the paranoid ramblings of a madman， illuminati this， big brother that。 However， in actuality， i found myself not only understanding， but， in part， relating to the main message of the book， if only partly。 I believe Theodore is correct about the collosal impact technology has had on the quality and enjoyment of life to the average man， and the idea of the "power process"， as he calls it， was an idea i had never thought of， but can definitely get behind。 However， not everything written in this book is gospel。 With a large cult of personality around him， it's easy to get lost in the clever wording and sophisticated argumentation this essay provides， however one mustn't forget this book， in it's whole， is essentially a call to arms asking people to overthrow modern society violently and swiftly。 Furthermore， the means Theodore popularised this message should not be forgotten - people had to die for his message to gain notoriety and traction。 Overall， i believe this book is worth a read not as a guidebook on how to live， but to experience a different perspective of life and take away what you can to help improve your life and your community。 。。。more
Omar Fuyu
，
Igual darle cinco estrellas a un ensayo escrito por un ecoterrorista que se cargó a gente con bombas caseras resulta algo raruno。 Siempre he tenido curiosidad por leer las "chifladuras" de Ted Kaczynski， como muchos las exponían。 La verdad es que con muchos de los párrafos expuestos estoy bastante de acuerdo （saludos a la GC）， aunque es evidente que Ted tiene cierto resquemor hacia el individuo "izquierdista sobre-socializado"。 El caso: que yo pensaba que esto iba a ser un rant tocho lleno de mo Igual darle cinco estrellas a un ensayo escrito por un ecoterrorista que se cargó a gente con bombas caseras resulta algo raruno。 Siempre he tenido curiosidad por leer las "chifladuras" de Ted Kaczynski， como muchos las exponían。 La verdad es que con muchos de los párrafos expuestos estoy bastante de acuerdo （saludos a la GC）， aunque es evidente que Ted tiene cierto resquemor hacia el individuo "izquierdista sobre-socializado"。 El caso: que yo pensaba que esto iba a ser un rant tocho lleno de mongoladas graciosas y。。。 No。 Está todo muy claramente explicado y reconoce que le faltan datos y que algunos de sus párrafos son simples especulaciones o simplificaciones por falta de tiempo。 Pero vaya， un pepino （¡Boom！） de ensayo anarco-primitivista。 。。。more
T。
，
Very insightful。 Thought provoking read。 While I disagree that we should get rid of industrial Society he makes some good points。 This book contains much truth。 Almost too much truth。 I could only read a couple chapters at a time because there is so much information in so little text。
✶ marta ✶
，
Totalmente in linea con i discorsi che già precedentemente portavo avanti， ispirata in più giovane età da Chomsky e Thoreau。 Nel saggio si notano anche i lati più puramente umani: la rabbia， la collera， il fastidio che fanno allontanare a volte i punti fondamentali del discorso， ma sono piccole "deviazioni" di cui "non si può essere sicuri"， come ammette nei paragrafi finali con autenticità。 Assolutamente non è il ritratto psicologico di un fanatico， ma di un uomo solido， che qualcosa di importa Totalmente in linea con i discorsi che già precedentemente portavo avanti， ispirata in più giovane età da Chomsky e Thoreau。 Nel saggio si notano anche i lati più puramente umani: la rabbia， la collera， il fastidio che fanno allontanare a volte i punti fondamentali del discorso， ma sono piccole "deviazioni" di cui "non si può essere sicuri"， come ammette nei paragrafi finali con autenticità。 Assolutamente non è il ritratto psicologico di un fanatico， ma di un uomo solido， che qualcosa di importante l'aveva intuito。 。。。more
Carrie
，
This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers。 To view it， click here。 He could’ve done anything with his education and opportunities， not to mention his intellect， and he chose to do this。 He chased his radical fantasies of society returning pre- industrial revolution， small central government， probably bartering and trading system eventually because he was pro unified world economy whilst also acknowledging that was probably not going to happen in this lifetime。 The unraveling of a （brilliant） madman who， at times， is eerily prophetic concerning the direction soc He could’ve done anything with his education and opportunities， not to mention his intellect， and he chose to do this。 He chased his radical fantasies of society returning pre- industrial revolution， small central government， probably bartering and trading system eventually because he was pro unified world economy whilst also acknowledging that was probably not going to happen in this lifetime。 The unraveling of a （brilliant） madman who， at times， is eerily prophetic concerning the direction societal structure would take once technology was widely available… think social media and its negative effects， etc…Staunchly insisted his is not a political revolution， yet spends a large portion of the piece blaming “leftists” and moderate conservatives for ever increasing government oversight and subsequent loss of individual self determination in daily life。May his victims and their loved ones be at peace。 。。。more
Ayub Abdisalam
，
genius。 loved his analysis of the "leftist mind"。 genius。 loved his analysis of the "leftist mind"。 。。。more
Haro
，
stop hating liberals
Zarmeen Lakhani
，
Ted kaczynski is a genius。 The verbosity and clarity in his thoughts earns my highest respect despite him being a bomber。
Marcin Zdunek
，
It took me great deal of time to read it， even though it is so short。 You can clearly tell that Mr Ted is no writer， it seems that he didn't reread and didn't refactor it。 Book jumps between ideas， some things are briefly written， but were explained much later。 You really have to read it from beginning to end， otherwise you can come up with ideas that are conradictory to what Mr Ted meant。 Most of the things he said may be new at the time he wrote it， but are now well known for everyone， that le It took me great deal of time to read it， even though it is so short。 You can clearly tell that Mr Ted is no writer， it seems that he didn't reread and didn't refactor it。 Book jumps between ideas， some things are briefly written， but were explained much later。 You really have to read it from beginning to end， otherwise you can come up with ideas that are conradictory to what Mr Ted meant。 Most of the things he said may be new at the time he wrote it， but are now well known for everyone， that learnt about it even a little bit， but there is still like 1/4 of text， that was new to me， and I was able to learn from it。 Expected something better， but it wasn't all bad。 Definitely every young person should read it。 。。。more
Kale Morrice
，
Me a computer science student （as Ted claims， "computer geek"）， while listening to this in an audiobook format on a mass video platform called Youtube。 Done with fast enough bandwidth to steadily listen in the background without buffering issues， and playing American Truck Simulator "just for fun"。 Just a couple hours earlier， ordered a Halal snack pack and got it delivered by UberEats， didn't need to hunt or even cook。 If Ted was dead， as he might be very soon， he would roll in his grave。I want Me a computer science student （as Ted claims， "computer geek"）， while listening to this in an audiobook format on a mass video platform called Youtube。 Done with fast enough bandwidth to steadily listen in the background without buffering issues， and playing American Truck Simulator "just for fun"。 Just a couple hours earlier， ordered a Halal snack pack and got it delivered by UberEats， didn't need to hunt or even cook。 If Ted was dead， as he might be very soon， he would roll in his grave。I want to point out， if you're going to kill people for a cause， （especially a former professor）， at least use proper citations。 If I submitted a paper with opinions， and the references are there to extend on the opinions said， I would fail。He claims that his writing must be down （by the reader） to fall under "common sense"。 Sure， lets say that is true。 We cannot explain why we don't have an equal amount of matter and antimatter in the universe。 Lets say in a 100 years， it becomes common knowledge a higher being did this to preserve life in the universe。 Since it is common sense then， why isn't it now？ Sure， maybe Ted is right about leftist are power hungry， however， what sociology journal did you read this in？ Do I just assume （at the time）， an unknown eco-terrorist "group" who had killed people， were right？ I'm not saying everything he wrote was nonsensical， he just greatly annoys me he took lives so he could have more than 15 people read his essay。 Top with that， it was all opinionated with history sprinkled in some paragraphs。 。。。more
vee ro
，
id rate this somewhere between 3-4 stars idk， definitely enjoyed this although i dont necessarily agree with some points that were made。 points were definitely made tho
Ellie Acuna
，
okay like。 the stuff about technology is interesting but he did lose me when he started talking about literally everything else。 i partially read this for the meme， obviously， but it was still interesting。 do i agree with literally anything？ no。 am i glad i read it？ no。 was it a waste of my time？ yes。 but he does have some interesting things in here-- "interesting" the same way that， i don't know， medieval torture techniques are "interesting" okay like。 the stuff about technology is interesting but he did lose me when he started talking about literally everything else。 i partially read this for the meme， obviously， but it was still interesting。 do i agree with literally anything？ no。 am i glad i read it？ no。 was it a waste of my time？ yes。 but he does have some interesting things in here-- "interesting" the same way that， i don't know， medieval torture techniques are "interesting" 。。。more
Maggie Hannis
，
Despite the occasional lapses into deranged rants， this manifesto is genuinely so based。
Petey Voitsekhovski
，