In 1971 Dr. Theodore Kaczynski rejected modern society and moved to a primitive cabin in …
Review of 'The Unabomber Manifesto' on 'Goodreads'
2 stars
I’m a strong defender of the principle that everyone has ideas, thoughts and statements that are worth listening to. It should not matter if this person is for or against your cause, or if this person is from another political background. I have a lot of discussions about this with other people that think some ideas need to be muted or that platforms need a stronger moderation. The discussion is not about hate speech or calls for violence, those need to be moderated and if necessary prosecuted via the laws of the corresponding country. The argument is for political statements, ideas, or general criticism depending whatever topic.
To proof my point, I decided to read the manifesto of the Unabomber, he is an extreme for my stance on this topic. He killed three and injured 23 with mail bombs and is rightfully declared a terrorist. I am a Computer Scientist, …
I’m a strong defender of the principle that everyone has ideas, thoughts and statements that are worth listening to. It should not matter if this person is for or against your cause, or if this person is from another political background. I have a lot of discussions about this with other people that think some ideas need to be muted or that platforms need a stronger moderation. The discussion is not about hate speech or calls for violence, those need to be moderated and if necessary prosecuted via the laws of the corresponding country. The argument is for political statements, ideas, or general criticism depending whatever topic.
To proof my point, I decided to read the manifesto of the Unabomber, he is an extreme for my stance on this topic. He killed three and injured 23 with mail bombs and is rightfully declared a terrorist. I am a Computer Scientist, and therefore one of those that need to be eliminated in his view. I’m not the target group of his message and I do not have the same view as him when it comes to technology. But nonetheless I think his ideas could be worth a read.
Overall, I have to say I do not agree with him on most parts (which was clear from the beginning) but some arguments he made I do agree with. The problem the left has (not the leftism paragraphs at the end, those seem to be a wild rant, the ones at the beginning I kind of agree), likewise the ambivalence of the right when it comes to technology. That technology has not only good sides but can also be used to control the population, is more than evident today, as an example when we look to China or the Surveillance-Agencies of the USA or UK. But after paragraphs 80 or so it starts to crumble, he contradicts him self with previous paragraphs, and seems to have an overall very US-centric view. Women, minorities and other nationalities are mentioned almost never and he shows clear xenophobia.
I could write pages about why I do not agree with him, but did I proof my point I set at the beginning? I think so yes. Even though he is a terrorist and is clearly a bad human being, I read some ideas and statements that are sane and worth a thought or even a discussion.
To have a good and fair discussion everyone needs to heard, even if this person does not support your views or goals.
