« First « Previous Comments 44 - 83 of 104 Next » Last » Search these comments
tanked saysWritten records didn't enslave humanity. That is the definition of the start of history and the end of prehistory. Should we have stayed at 3200 BC level tech? Even speaking and language is technology. If you really want to go back to the true beginning of tech it's the ape man living in the cave. Or even further if you don't want any tech at all, before he figured out that the cave shelters him from the rain.
Pointing out the pros and cons of what occurred since the invention of the written record is not equivalent to saying that it automatically enslaved everyone. Verbal story telling was still allowed, and still is. Just have to have the individual ambition to do so.
Being enslaved, or not, is about the choice of the individual. So if you want to ban farmers from being able to buy tractors, or prevent it's invention, then the technocrat is you.
Also it's the big banksters as yo...
But you said it yourself, what technocrat is to blame for big bank usury, when they are run by technocrats. Are you confused?
Technology has benefits AND drawbacks.
So you want to ignore all the other examples, guessing because you don't have an explanation, and focus on this one. Fine. Do you believe people should not be compensated for the technology they create? A tractor is a complex machine, and you can't make it out of plastic. So this technology requires a substantial investment. That has nothing to do with anyone, it's simply a fact of the tractors existence. A tractor also gives the farm the ability to quickly produce more food using less manpower. I'll refer you to Steinbeck for that outcome. Also a fact of the tractor's existence. Banks are not technocrats, they are lenders to farmers who don't want to lose their farms, so they expand. If anything you could try and blame the farmers themselves, but are you really going to point the finger at someone investing in their career that feeds their family? The banker has always been there, always lending, since the beginning of economics when they literally stored money in your cave...
Unabomber was a nutjob. No wonder he fought against life itself in more ways than one. If he was sane at all he'd be waking people up to what technocrats are up to - like many in alt media try to do.
Shaman saysWhy were the labs there?
Cheap labor.
The man struggled with every piece of Postmodernism and broke it down, up to and including Transmaxxing (!!!), which he rejected.
Absolutely NOTHING in that quote in that pic is profound, it is in the category of "No shit, Sherlock!" That sick minded clown planted a book bomb that blew up in the hands of a friend of mine, costing him several fingers and ending his training to fly the Space Shuttle.
Absolutely NOTHING in that quote in that pic is profound, it is in the category of "No shit, Sherlock!" That sick minded clown planted a book bomb that blew up in the hands of a friend of mine, costing him several fingers and ending his training to fly the Space Shuttle.
The problem as I see it is we have a very complacent population that MIGHT see the danger of our oligarchs, but hasn't been fucked by them yet, so I'm kind of looking forward to the fucking.
Darrell Brooks
But I'm not letting emotion rule my thought because Kaczynski didn't blow anyone up that I know.
to get their law passed
Sending bombs to random people is not crazy?
RWSGFY says
Sending bombs to random people is not crazy?
Didn't he send them to agencies that he considered responsible for society's problems? If that's the case, he probably considered any agent of those entities to be as guilty as the next.
The very idea that individual randomized terror can achieve any lofty goals is the sign of crazy. Things don't work like that.
Don't know much about the Unabomber, but have looked a bit into OKC. McVeigh may or may not have had a hand in planting the bombs. He was still likely working for the military. Only thing we need to know about OKC, government killed kids, on purpose, to get their law passed. If you do any research at all, the evidence is overwhelming.
The very idea that individual randomized terror can achieve any lofty goals is the sign of crazy. Things don't work like that.
He didn't do anything worse than the government does. How many deaths do you think the government is guilty of by incitement? I have a feeling there's going to be even more at some point.
Eric Holder says
The very idea that individual randomized terror can achieve any lofty goals is the sign of crazy. Things don't work like that.
Crazy is when there's no rhyme or reason to an action. Like when people shoot up a school yet had no beef with the kids, teachers, or school system.
He was a murderous asshole who killed and maimed people that I didn't think deserved it, but I'm not sure that he was actually crazy just because of this. He thought they did deserve it. We're routinely told that small, seemingly inconsequential actions can help achieve lofty goals like changing the world.
Haven't read through this entire thread - but did anyone mention Ted's gender problem?
Random violence doesn't work? I beg to differ. BLM and Antifa would disagree as well.
There is actually a fair amount of evidence that McVeigh had help from an Iraqi as payback for Gulf War I. Remember the dark skinned "John Doe #2" that several people claimed to have seen with the bomb truck?
« First « Previous Comments 44 - 83 of 104 Next » Last » Search these comments
Man, sometimes it feels like the world is completely upside-down..
https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/tqq1r9/uncle_ted_kaczynski_warned_us_over_30yrs_ago/?source=patrick.net