Industrial Society and its Future: Oversocialization

The following post is a commentary on Industrial Society and Its Future, specifically the section Oversocialization. You may recognize the title as the manifesto by the Unabomber, Theodore Kaczynski. As a high school student during the 1990s I was interested in this mysterious figure and wanted to read the manifesto but never had the opportunity. Over the past year due to Covid-19 and several podcasts mentioning the Unabomber and his manifesto. During my internet snooping I learned that Kaczynski had written other books besides the manifesto and that he was still alive, writing letters in prison, and would never be released. Throw in a few facts like he was the subject of an LSD experiment in college as part of the MKUltra mind control program and you have an interesting individual to write about. So, who is this guy that had his brain fried, was a mathematical genius, taught at Berkley, bought a cabin in the woods, and started mailing bombs in order to save the world from its own destruction? Let’s find out.

“On the Contrary, the left takes an accepted moral principle, adopts it as its own, and then accuses mainstream society of violating the principle. Examples: racial equality, equality of the sexes, helping poor people, peace as opposed to war, nonviolence generally, freedom of expression, kindness to animals. More fundamentally, the duty of the individual to serve society and the duty of society to take care of the individual.” From Paragraph 28.

If I had to sum this up in an easier way, I would consider the leftist ideology to be a secular religion. In any religion the people who are the resent converts are the people most active in the church or organization, loud and vocal, accusatory, and they tend to be the most violent in an effort to gain favor in their new tribe. Keep in mind that this manifesto was published in 1995 but for some reason it applies even more today with the critical race theory crowd and the social justice warriors infesting our institutions. Somehow, Kaczynski, decades ahead of his time, saw what was coming and typed out on paper the dangers of this progressive movement. I can look at the world of today and say that he was ahead of his time, but now that I think about it maybe this had been the way things were all along. Edward Abbey wrote a book called the Monkey Wrench Gang about a group of ecoterrorists driving around the country creating havoc and causing mayhem where ever they went. There were the anti-war activists during the Vietnam war who were making bombs and trying to fight violence with violence. Charles Manson wasn’t exactly a conservative. When you look at the history of the 1990’s all of the violent acts committed by the Federal Government against US citizens took place under the Clinton administration. Ruby Ridge and Waco were botched raids that didn’t need to happen but they were for the good of… who ever. Still, none of this explains why this portion of the manifesto applies so appropriately to our world today, where a handful of SJWs push an agenda of Equity and Equality (even though none of them know the definitions of these terms) and how our society has been hijacked by recent converts to the woke religion for the sake of racial equality, equality of over 72 genders, and helping poor people stay poor. Nothing could explain this better than the next portion of the paragraph.

“Leftists, especially those of the oversocialized type, usually do not rebel against these principles but justify their hostility to society by claiming (with some degree of truth) that society is not living up to these principles.” From paragraph 28.

I have heard this time and time again. While working in a “woke” environment for a few years I quickly realized that the people who surrounded me for hours a day wore a mask of peace and love but that would disappear when their ideology was questioned. It didn’t take much, state some facts, your own experiences living in a neighborhood or experiencing your own poverty during your life and you suddenly became a problem. Like any new convert to a religion, they will violently oppose any opposition to their ideology and with the more facts or evidence you show the more violent they become. This violence doesn’t have to be in the form of throwing a punch either, it can simply be spreading rumors, talking to HR, or filing complaints about being offended, in order to remove the obstacle to their preferred Utopian world.

“If they engage in violence they claim to be fighting against racism or the like.” From paragraph 30.

The riots of 2020 show this better than any other time in our nation’s history. In Minneapolis, there were over $500 million in damages but the true estimate is roughly $2 billion because this figure is based on insurance payouts and not the actual costs to victims. Across the rest of the country Black Lives Matter, a leftist organization, is responsible for another $2 billion in damages from coast to coast. The organization is also responsible for the deaths of dozens of people, mostly black (African American) and demanded the defunding of police departments across the country that immediately caused a spike in crime including gun violence, murder, robbery, home invasions, looting, and rapes. All in the name of racial equality. The violence far exceeded the inequality they said they were “protesting” against but if you spoke against the riots you were to be burned at the stake, or in the modern form, cancelled. The left has figured out one very important thing, there is no point in killing someone for not agreeing with you when you can destroy their life, and keep them around as an example to what could happen to you if you speak up against the religion of the left (woke).

“Low self-esteem, depressive tendencies and defeatism are not restricted to the left. Though they are especially noticeable in the left, they are widespread in our society.” From paragraph 32.

This couldn’t be truer than the number of SJWs who proclaim they are racists while saying there is no cure for racism. In the book White Fragility by Robin DiAngelo, she admits to being racists while also guiding people through her program to no longer be racists. It’s like Satan leading the sinners to hell in order to work through their original sin of being white only to learn there is no cure because, from the beginning, there wasn’t a disease. Then you have Ibram X. Kendi who proclaims that the only wat to fight racism is to have more racism. To put it in plane English, become the thing you are fighting against. I guess he never read Nietzsche or heard the quote “And if you gaze long enough into the abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.” Of course, quoting such things is racist and a move that a white supremacist would make because Nietzsche was from the West. Throwing out the knowledge of those that came before and thinking that we can make a change from something new that has never been tried before, and yet it has (several times over), is the ideology of an idiot who has lived little, possibly cares a lot, but has no idea what to do about… anything. If these people had the slightest bit of self-esteem, they wouldn’t be degrading themselves while trying to take power from those who are morally correct in their own ideals. If you have to use force and intimidating to prove you are correct, you’re not. If you have to degrade yourself and others in order to make the world a better place the people you accuse of being racist or homophobes aren’t evil, it’s you.

Standard

The Great Reset: Contact tracing, contact tracking and surveillance

“The most effective form of tracking or tracing is obviously the one powered by technology: it not only allows backtracking of all the contacts with whom the user of a mobile phone has been in touch. But also tracking the user’s real time movements, which in turn affords the possibility to better enforce a lockdown and to warn other mobile users in the proximity of the carrier that they have been exposed to someone infected.” Pages 160-161.

Let’s be honest here, for years now the NSA has been doing what is described up above. The recent shooter in Boulder Colorado was on the FBI watch list and was able to buy an AR-15 and shoot ten people six days later. I know that this suddenly changed from pandemic to gun control, but hear me out. Just like the failure of stopping a mass shooting on behalf of the FBI, the CDC will not be able to stop the spread of a pandemic by following every citizen digitally. This section talks about proximity but it does not discuss the usual method that a virus is spread, droplet. The CDC starts to look into patient zero and finds that they were on a train for thirty minutes returning home from work. There were a dozen other people on the car. But let’s say this person had a disease like Ebola which is spread through body fluids. Patient zero sneezes into his hand, puts his hand on a rail before leaving, and exits the train car. None of the other passengers touched that hand rail but yet according to this paragraph those are the ones who will be contacted and put into isolation even though they are not at risk. Meanwhile, several people board the train over the next hour, touching the handrail, following by their eyes, nose, mouth, biting their finger nails, etc. now you have infected people and nobody will know until they start to show symptoms. Digital surveillance is a nightmare waiting to happen and we already saw what can happen when the wrong people are using it like in China.

The Risk of Dystopia

“As the last few pages have exposed beyond a reasonable doubt, the pandemic could open an era of active health surveillance made possible by location-detecting smartphones, facial-recognition cameras and other technologies that identify sources of infection and track the spread of a disease in quasi real time.” Page 168.

To be fair this section of the book sounded like a general warning of what could happen if policies are put into place and expanded beyond what is considered safe for society. It is difficult to know if this was added as an insurance policy against what will likely happen so that the authors can say “we warned you” instead of “this is what we wanted.” This chapter maps out what could happen if surveillance is taken to new extremes. While the book focuses on the spread of diseases in the near future it is not difficult to see this same technology being used to control the population in regard to climate change, social justice, or pollution. Could we receive warnings via cell phone saying that our stop to the local grocery store was not justified because we didn’t buy enough to warrant the trip and the carbon emissions created? Maybe our cellphone hears us using a word that is no longer allowed even though it was said in the privacy of your own home and now you have to pay a tax or a fine for saying it. In China we are already seeing trash cans that monitor how much food is being thrown away and penalizing these people for wasting food.

The people who implement these policies don’t think they are creating a dystopia. Nobody in history ever thought they were making the world worse than it was before. Stalin thought that he had created paradise but in doing so it was against the law to criticize the new society that he had created. Mao thought that he was standing up for the little guy while invading Tibet, changing the social structure, outlawing any symbols of the “old way” and in the end millions of people died. None of these people thought they were doing more harm than good. In the future, will people look back at those implementing the Great Reset and wonder how we could have gotten things so wrong by following a policy that will, in the end, kill billions of people, for what is considered, the great good?

There are two movements that are happening at the moment. One pushes the ability to monitor the public through cell phones that the majority of people own. The other is looking at using less or no technology in order to save the planet. The mostly peaceful anti-technology protestor Theodore Kaczynski wrote a handful of books about technological slavery and an anti tech revolution. In the last year Greta Thunberg, the now 18-year-old environmental activist, has been writing Kaczynski trying to figure out a way to push an anti-tech agenda in order to save the planet. If people starting tossing their cell phones aside and start to live a life with less where does that leave the CDC with contact tracing and monitoring the public? I have to say that this is not such a bad idea, minus the mail bombs and killing innocent people. The FDA is in the process of requiring farmers to have GPS coordinance for all of their crops in order to sell their product, but where does that leave the Amish? There are still large populations of people who do not participate in the modern world and I am happy to see that they are there. It’s a control group in a scientific sense of the word. During Covid-19 the Amish have refused to wear mask because they believe that only sinners can catch the disease. We have not seen any numbers for the infection rate of the Amish during the pandemic. These people do not own cell phones or travel very far from their homes, but they still interact with the general public through trade. Furniture stores and grocery stores remained open and yet we did not hear about anyone in the Amish community contracting Covid-19. In a place as rural and remote as Amish community how does the CDC do their job in contact tracing and isolating the disease? Or do they not care?  

Standard