Originally published via American Thinker: Having previously read and his manifesto some years ago, I have been revisiting the Unabomber's treatise on technology and its toxic effects on society and individual psychology. (I feel compelled -- not out of moral obligation, because I believe any rational person is capable of separating the message from the messenger but because of
BTW. I started re-reading Kaczynski this week as well, as have a few other friends of mine. It's amazing how prescient he was about so many things. The passage you quoted from really nails it...
As the example of the Unabomber reminds us, good philosophy is one thing and sound praxis another thing altogether. C.S. Lewis, no mean philosopher himself, pointed out that the "power over nature" granted by technology is in reality the power of some people over others. Sometimes this power is benign, as when dealing with an honest mechanic who can repair your car (which you may be unable to do.) Often, particularly where governments are concerned, it is not. Technology can also be addicting, even apart from the deliberately designed dopamine hits when using social media. Comfort, convenience, status purchased rather than earned...all these things can become so addicting that we adjust our lives in order to better secure these "drugs."
"LatinX" is just absurd. I find it darkly humorous how hard the woke try and force people to use it, but it's not catching on and most "Latinos" think it's equally ridiculous.
Communists, which is what the grievance industry is full of, always try to control language because by controlling language, you can control the narrative even when you can't defend your insane and ridiculous positions. It's is all part of their attempt to destroy society and rebuild it in their own evil image.
The Unabomber vs. liberal psychology
However, HILLBILLY, cracker, hick, and the like have not been addressed by the lefties.
BTW. I started re-reading Kaczynski this week as well, as have a few other friends of mine. It's amazing how prescient he was about so many things. The passage you quoted from really nails it...
As the example of the Unabomber reminds us, good philosophy is one thing and sound praxis another thing altogether. C.S. Lewis, no mean philosopher himself, pointed out that the "power over nature" granted by technology is in reality the power of some people over others. Sometimes this power is benign, as when dealing with an honest mechanic who can repair your car (which you may be unable to do.) Often, particularly where governments are concerned, it is not. Technology can also be addicting, even apart from the deliberately designed dopamine hits when using social media. Comfort, convenience, status purchased rather than earned...all these things can become so addicting that we adjust our lives in order to better secure these "drugs."
"LatinX" is just absurd. I find it darkly humorous how hard the woke try and force people to use it, but it's not catching on and most "Latinos" think it's equally ridiculous.
Mate... We are legion, not the examples of mindless peddled shitfuckery..
I'm not giving up retard as a word either.. So many connotations.
Communists, which is what the grievance industry is full of, always try to control language because by controlling language, you can control the narrative even when you can't defend your insane and ridiculous positions. It's is all part of their attempt to destroy society and rebuild it in their own evil image.
Ole' Ted was right about a lot, especially traffic lights (lol).
Ted was a product of MKULTRA. Question is: was he a failed or a successful experiment?
Check on the English language:
Colored person vs Person of Color.
They have the same meaning.
I have asked many of the years about this and the answer is always that Colored Person is racist while Person of Color is not.
And even if we did vote on it - the fix would be in.