anarchyintheyouuuk wrote

If you'd like to record a voice discussion or work on a text discussion, I'd be delighted.

I live in New Zealand so the time difference would make this difficult if not impossible. Also I'd be very wary of discussing my ideas with you over voice given that only last week you said on here that you hoped the admins of a website you didn't like got arrested and locked up. I suspect the person you were talking to previously about recording something dropped out for the same reason.


anarchyintheyouuuk wrote

Never done anything like that, you must be confusing this for me simply researching in what way he related to his attacks on technology as primarily a personal passion project.

You recorded an hour and a half long show where you and another person go back and forth over and over again about the time 1) Ted was briefly separated from his family as a child (routine practice to this day) 2) MK Ultra (discredited conspiracy theory invented by his defence to save him from the death penalty) and 3) his lack of success with women (as if Ted is the only person ever who struggled to form relationships in this hellscape we live in).

Of the hour and a half, you discussed his philosophy for maybe five minutes. As an aside, I remember this was the show where you said schooling for children should be standardised and compulsory.

While you're here, why have you registered the subreddits and and posted techbro William Gillis's anti-primitivist screed there? In fact, why have you done this with nearly a hundred different subreddits?


anarchyintheyouuuk wrote

Terrorist attack are not a thing for any RECENT indigenous movement linked to eco-terrorism

The Niger Delta warriors bombing the oil corporations (indiscriminately killing hundreds so far, including children) aren't eco enough for you?

Mujahideen u pushed to far mate, they are native alright but indigenous suppose a different category of people.

I'm guessing that category of people is 'cuddly natives who white people think are cool'?

Here's the story about the most cuddly of all natives, Ishi, last of the Yahi tribe, and the terror his people inflicted on everyone who wasn't Yahi:

Buuut I doubt you'll see what's in front of you, and will instead, again, try to redefine what is meant by indigenous, or what is meant by terror, or what is meant by eco. I'm reminded of this letter:

"In my extensive correspondence with Kevin, he would never under any circumstances admit that he was wrong about anything. Whenever I pointed out a fact that he found inconvenient, he would manipulate words, assigning eccentric meanings to them in order to make the inconvenient fact go away."


anarchyintheyouuuk wrote

I post anonymously.

Some formerly anarchist people buy into his ideas out of a desire to view the world in a more rigidly simplistic way and leave broader campaigns behind which is often both a detriment to their own quality of life and others.

Why is it that anything not in line with your workerist dogma is a 'rigidly simplistic way to view the world'? Do you really think that your 19th century workplace democracy BS (sprinkled with Food Not Bombs NGO charity work) is some deep, rich tradition?

As a professor at Berkeley during the height of the Vietnam war protests Kaczynski would have been very aware of militant campaigns. He romanticized the anti-hero in Joseph Conrad's novel The Secret Agent. And he was angry at being a product of kind of conservative by todays standards emotionally repressed parents. And so he chose a kind of militant purism.

It always comes back to the pop-psychology with you. Not once have I ever heard you engage with Ted's ideas. Or primitivist ideas. Or post-left ideas. Or any ideas, come to think of it. Instead you copy and paste long lists of texts that you clearly haven't read and dismiss them with the word 'purist' and by telling an anecdote about the time Ted was dropped on his head as a baby or something.

It's really tiresome. Maybe you could find yourself a new hobby? Studying psychology and becoming a social worker would suit you, I think.


anarchyintheyouuuk wrote (edited )

It's the same deal: Ishkah pretends to be presenting a big brain neutral take on the subject but is really just pushing his usual agenda against anarchists of action. As well as the moral crusading, I suspect there's a financial motivation. Fortunately, it seems unlikely Ishkah's hit pieces will ever get off the ground. Publishing a book about a living person is not as easy as just copying and pasting stuff from the internet, splicing your own crappy 'commentary' in the middle, and listing the result on Amazon.