Opinion Why Right-Wing Extremists Love the Unabomber - Cottagecore and memes were the real fascism all along

“The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.” So begins Theodore J. Kaczynski’s 1995 manifesto, Industrial Society and Its Future—a 35,000-word call to arms for a revolt against technology. Kaczynski, better known as the Unabomber, was an American domestic terrorist whose 17-year bombing campaign killed three people and injured 23 others. Seeking to protect wilderness and destroy technology, he targeted scientists and businessmen. However, Kaczynski’s contemporary influence isn’t strongest among environmental activists. Rather, his manifesto and ideology have found a home on far-right websites, where Kaczynski is cited as a key radicalizing influence and thought leader in spaces generally extremely hostile to modern environmentalism.

Kacyznski’s critique of industrial society as harmful to human freedom has been co-opted and incorporated into a broader yet still explicitly ethnonationalist critique of modernity. On imageboards, Twitter and TikTok, young right-wing extremists create memes and engage in discussion about Kaczynski, referring to him fondly as “Uncle Ted.” Reverence for Kaczynski is one manifestation of a broader trend: right-wing extremists using environmentalist language and perspectives on topics like pollution and wilderness preservation to support violent mobilization. This phenomenon can be understood as an attempt to strengthen the allure of far-right ideology by appealing to popular concerns regarding the destruction of the environment to justify fascist beliefs.

Kaczynski, who is currently serving multiple life sentences at a maximum security prison in Colorado, is a strange inspiration for modern right-wing extremists. Although he has dismissed leftists for being driven by “feelings of inferiority” and for their attachment to “the conventional attitudes of our society while pretending to be in rebellion against it,” he has denounced both conservatives and fascists as well. In Industrial Society and Its Future, he describes conservatives as “fools,” and in his 2010 book Technological Slavery, he describes Nazism as a “kook ideology.” He rejects any sort of politics whose focus is not the “revolution against the technoindustrial system.”

For right-wing extremists, the appeal of Kaczynski’s works originates in their identification of Kaczynski’s narrative about the development of industrial civilization and the destruction of wilderness with their own narrative about what they perceive to be the replacement and disempowerment of white people. Kaczynski’s description of the alienation of people from one another caused by technology aligns with white supremacists’ calls for solidarity among white people to resist what they regard as the threat of oppression and “white genocide.” Kaczynski’s writing reinforces their romanticizing of rural life and traditional values, juxtaposing their ideal society against the “technological society,” which Kaczynski writes “HAS TO weaken family ties and local communities if it is to function effectively.” Kaczynski’s lack of overt racism does not dissuade white supremacists from agreeing with him: In a typical thread about Kaczynski on a far-right discussion board, one poster argues that “if goals of say Kaczynski … would bear fruit, Jewry would be finished one way or another.” By reading a racial dimension into his words, white supremacists have co-opted Kaczynski’s ideology.

The far-right’s valorization of Kaczynski is evidenced by the degree to which his words and ideas have spread both on the broader internet and in right-wing spaces in recent years. While some anarchist admirers of Kaczynski have attempted to live out his ideology by learning survival skills and adopting a primitive lifestyle, Kaczynski as a figure has been profoundly meme-ified by right-wing fans. For instance, their invocation of the phrase “the industrial revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race” as a response to perceived failings of modern society has spread beyond far-right corners of the internet and begun to permeate mainstream spaces, including YouTube and TikTok. Adopting both joking and sincere tones, documents describing Kaczynski’s ideology to a right-wing audience circulate on spaces like 4chan’s “Politically Incorrect” board. In a thread titled “Ted Kaczynski General,” a document that explains Kaczynski’s appeal responds to concerns that the real problem is “International Jewry/Zionism, blacks, diversity and Multiculturalism” by arguing that “nobody is denying” those things are a “net negative” but that those “grave problems are dwarfed when compared to industrial society and its consequences.” The thread also links to a document full of instructions for “prepping” for the inevitable fall of industrial society, including tips on self-improvement, nutrition, medicine and combat. These are just a handful of examples of a broader trend. A search for “Kaczynski” in archives of 4chan’s politics section turns up 17,214 results.

The increasing popularity of Kaczynski in right-wing spaces is one part of a growing strain of thought within right-wing extremism that incorporates environmental concerns as part of a racist and fascist worldview. A reading list shared on right-wing imageboards titled “Deep Ecology: An Introduction for Nationalists” includes Kaczynski’s works alongside thinkers from both left- and right-wing backgrounds. This hybrid ideology has found its way into real-world violent mobilization. Anders Behring Breivik, the Norwegian terrorist who killed 77 people in attacks in Oslo and Utoya in 2011, directly copied parts of his manifesto from Kaczynski’s, substituting words like “multiculturalism” for “leftism.” Environmentalist issues have also inspired right-wing terrorists who did not explicitly cite Kaczynski. Brenton Tarrant, who killed 51 Muslims in a mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand, in 2019, explicitly cited environmentalism as one of his primary motivations. In his manifesto, Tarrant wrote that he desires “ethnic autonomy for all peoples with a focus on the preservation of nature” and stated that “green nationalism is the only true nationalism.” Patrick Crusius, who targeted Latinos in a 2019 attack in a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, described his anger at corporations that employ immigrants in low-wage jobs and connected this to corporations’ pollution of the environment, arguing that the necessary response is to “decrease the number of people in America using resources.” These arguments dovetail with those of Kaczynski admirers on the right-wing internet that join concerns about the preservation of the environment to concerns about the preservation of the white race.

The incorporation of this environmentalist dimension into white supremacism is an ideological innovation, but so far there is no evidence of related tactical shifts. There do not appear to be operational differences between violent right-wing actors who express support for environmental goals and those who do not. Despite drawing on Kaczynski for inspiration and employing rhetoric emphasizing the destruction of the environment as a central threat facing humanity as a whole and white people in particular, these far-right extremists have not targeted sites explicitly associated with industrial society. Rather than attacking oil pipelines or hydroelectric dams, self-professed “ecofascists” like Tarrant attack the same kinds of people and places as non-environmentalist right-wing terrorists such as Dylann Roof or Robert Bowers.

This may change if climate change and environmental crises around the world motivate more right-wing extremists to embrace Kaczynski and the ecofascist ideology. These actors claim that creating and maintaining spaces exclusively for white people will require both violent action against modern society and its technological elements and against non-white individuals. Though environmentalist concerns are often associated with left-wing politics, this new hybrid ideology demonstrates that concern for the environment is not confined to any one part of the political spectrum. The internet and social media have facilitated the cross-pollination of ideas that may initially appear to be incongruous but that extremists have found ways to integrate into their worldviews. Anticipating and responding effectively to extremist threats requires a nuanced understanding of how actors justify their beliefs and their violent mobilization, and the far-right’s appropriation of Kaczynski’s work is a telling variation in the story some extremists tell themselves.

 
Ted is a published author from prison with the help of several philosophy professors, published Technological Slavery which expands on his original manifesto and Anti-Tech Revolution: Why and How.
His original manifesto is also available on paperback, and you could probably even find it in your local library.
I'll have to check it out incognito. I've never trusted the internet, tracking companies and governments, less than I do now.
 
I've yet to meet anyone who has actually read his manifesto and then went on to say he was completely wrong, at most some have said they disagree with some of his points. He was simply correct in what he was saying (not what he was doing fedboy). Kinda hard to discredit someone as a total lunatic when they are able to explain very succinctly why they believe what they do and do it in a way that doesn't come off as a raving loon.
 
I've yet to meet anyone who has actually read his manifesto and then went on to say he was completely wrong, at most some have said they disagree with some of his points. He was simply correct in what he was saying (not what he was doing fedboy). Kinda hard to discredit someone as a total lunatic when they are able to explain very succinctly why they believe what they do and do it in a way that doesn't come off as a raving loon.
Not really.

He blew up random people who didn't even know him with pipebombs.... that's lunacy right there.

Nobody said lunatics can't write from the heart.... but a passionate plea for a better society doesn't mean much when you then go out and blow some poor guy's hands off for the crime of working in the timber industry.
 
Not really.

He blew up random people who didn't even know him with pipebombs.... that's lunacy right there.

Nobody said lunatics can't write from the heart.... but a passionate plea for a better society doesn't mean much when you then go out and blow some poor guy's hands off for the crime of working in the timber industry.
That's why I said he was right about what he said, not what he did. I don't think bombing people you are convinced are going to lead to mass suffering when you can explain very clearly why you believe that makes you a loon, does make you a really bad judge of what the best methods are for getting your ideas out there though, even if it did kinda succeed.
 
Agreed.... he was a pretty successful Loon, all things considered.

Most loony people never graduate beyond annoying everyone else on the bus.
 
That's always been my morbid curiosity with the man.

Smart enough to be a professional mathematician

Smart enough to be established in academia by his 20's

Smart enough to convincingly write the same "Man, life sucks sometimes" ramblings as almost anyone else who ever put pen to paper has, but in such a way that people hold it up as some kind of one-of-a-kind treatise on humanity

Smart enough to live off the land without modern convenicence

Smart enough to handle explosives without blowing himself up



And yet.... DUMB enough to think that the course of the world could be altered by sending one pipe bomb every six months to mid-level bureaucrats and industrial managers at random.

Everyone understands his social anomy... but plenty of people who are arguably "dumber" than him could've told him he'd get nowhere with that grand plan except a jail cell they'd never let you out of.
Smart people are just dumb people with less limits. They have the same egoism and irrationality but since they handle it better, they don’t get beaten by it as much.
 
Killing people with bombs as an act of political protest was commonplace in the 1970s. Ted just didn't have organizations full of lawyers waiting to cover his ass like the rich-kid commies did.
 
That's always been my morbid curiosity with the man.

Smart enough to be a professional mathematician

Smart enough to be established in academia by his 20's

Smart enough to convincingly write the same "Man, life sucks sometimes" ramblings as almost anyone else who ever put pen to paper has, but in such a way that people hold it up as some kind of one-of-a-kind treatise on humanity

Smart enough to live off the land without modern convenicence

Smart enough to handle explosives without blowing himself up



And yet.... DUMB enough to think that the course of the world could be altered by sending one pipe bomb every six months to mid-level bureaucrats and industrial managers at random.

Everyone understands his social anomy... but plenty of people who are arguably "dumber" than him could've told him he'd get nowhere with that grand plan except a jail cell they'd never let you out of.
Yeah, that is why this saying from a relative stuck with me: "There is a difference between being intelligent and being smart" Considering so many academics act like complete retards while some less educated people can make it big, that statement more than holds water. Ted fucked up big time by bombing people, in fact it's a death sentence to the establishment like that unless you can wage civil war or subvert it like most of the Marxist bastards are doing atm.

It's called autism.
Explains why he was close to trooning out as well.
Yeah forgot about that. Trooning out is NEVER a good Idea. Correct me If I'm wrong but hasn't the current leftist issues not compared to MKUltra on more than one occasion?
 
The author has clearly never read the manifesto and equates it with ‘far right survivalism.’ It’s a lazy piece. If you’re going to write in this at least read it, it’s pretty short and concise.
Kaczynski’s opinions were right. His actions in killing and maiming were wrong. The left cannot seem to accept that someone who does a bad thing can be right in other ways - they must label someone as entirely pure or entirely bad.
Kaczynski did something bad - letterbombing is inherently wrong because bombing people is wrong anyway, and you cannot guarantee a target. Anyone could have opened the parcels. So his actions were wrong. His views on oversocialisation were right. His opinion that technology evolves to stop benefitting humans and humans end up adapting to suit the tech - that is demonstrably right as well. I don’t see how anybody can argue in our current society that oversocialisation damage isn’t real, given what we know about social media. And I don’t see how anybody can argue that the whole edifice of technology is purely a tool for us to use.
If they think bombing is wrong (I think bombing is wrong) then I’m sure they’re simply outraged that Susan Rosenberg, who bombed federal buildings, got a presidential pardon and now runs the finances for BLM… right?
 
Uncle ted was a funny sorta guy because he's the archetype of what the future of western civilization holds. White well educated Men fed up and feeling passed over and no longer belonging to the world around them. Kinda of like the movie falling down. Tptb fears this because there's nothing to stop them and the damage they can cause worse still is there writing's because more often then not despite being homicidal they are right about there grievances and gain a following
 
Última edición:
Atrás
Top Abajo