anybody else feel this way about the UNABOMBER?

  Fred McGriff said:

there's a weird lurker on watmm who always surfaces when the unabomber comes up and it's creepy as fuck

goDel or epsy?

neither, some other dude. wait and see

oi!

lol, sorry dude.

The Unabomber's wikipedia page DOES NOT mention MK ULTRA.

The MK ULTRA page DOES mention the Unabomber.

OMG CONSPIRACY!!

  lumpenprol said:

Psychology is a pretty dark thing in some ways. It can be used for good or for evil.

I got my undergraduate degree in psychology. While I think it's a very interesting subject, it's overly concerned with reducing people down to discrete elements, like they're a computer. I got turned off to the attitude that people can be 'figured out'. I've lost a lot of interest but I still have respect for guys like Jung that were more concerned with maximizing ourselves as people instead of using psychology as a strictly analytical tool. Attitudes like that result in psyche-harming experiments like the one that Kacynzski went through.

He mentions the demolition of his wilderness sanctuary in 1983 as what sparks off his need for revenge, but he'd already been mail bombing for five years by that point according to the wiki article. Were those first few just recreational bombings?

His choice of victims seem pretty random. At least target people who are significant parts of the problem. If your goal is to cause mass hysteria in order to cause the system to collapse, a mail bomb every few years isn't going to do the trick. Though I supposed in the end he did get his manifesto published, so he wasn't a total failure as a terrorist I guess. Disappointing for a purported genius though. I want my money back.

well, if he hadn't bombed shit, i probably wouldn't ever read his wikipedia page.

True. But he could have been a little more selective about his victims. It`s hard to be sympathetic towards a guy targeting airplanes full of innocents and computer store managers. There could have been tree spiking environmentalists on that airplane who would have otherwise helped his cause.

well i think the point of the bombings was that they were unpredictable. he wanted to destroy entire economic aspects of US society, but overestimated what his impact would be. most people just think the unabomber is just some crazy guy who mails people bombs, not a revolutionary, which i don't think he was going for.

See that's the thing, his bombings were far too infrequent for it to cause effective hysteria of any sort. He was just hurting a few random people that had nothing to do with what he was angry about (aside from being a part of the system he loathed, as he'd been up until a few years earlier). I guess this is obvious to the point that it goes without saying, so I'll shut up now. Goodbye Unabomber.

  vamos scorcho said:

just read this article:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unabomber

 

the way I feel:

 

fascinating and brilliant person. would never EVER have the balls to do what he did

 

but his ideas and thoughts make plenty of sense to me, in fact they were thoughts and beliefs I had already myself about the world.

 

especially regarding the term "over-socialized" or whatever it was

I feel that way about Al-Quaeda.

Kaczynski's real problem was throwing the baby out with the bath water.