I have done some reading over the Thanksgiving Holiday and found some interesting things to compare and thought I should share them. It is about the Environmentalism movement.

Let us look at the following here.

The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in "advanced" countries, but they have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued development of technology will worsen the situation. It will certainly subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased physical suffering even in "advanced" countries.

The industrial-technological system may survive or it may break down. If it survives, it MAY eventually achieve a low level of physical and psychological suffering, but only after passing through a long and very painful period of adjustment and only at the cost of permanently reducing human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. Furthermore, if the system survives, the consequences will be inevitable: There is no way of reforming or modifying the system so as to prevent it from depriving people of dignity and autonomy.

If the system breaks down the consequences will still be very painful. But the bigger the system grows the more disastrous the results of its breakdown will be, so if it is to break down it had best break down sooner rather than later.

We therefore advocate a revolution against the industrial system. This revolution may or may not make use of violence: it may be sudden or it may be a relatively gradual process spanning a few decades. We can't predict any of that. But we do outline in a very general way the measures that those who hate the industrial system should take in order to prepare the way for a revolution against that form of society. This is not to be a POLITICAL revolution. Its object will be to overthrow not governments but the economic and technological basis of the present society.

In this article we give attention to only some of the negative developments that have grown out of the industrial-technological system. Other such developments we mention only briefly or ignore altogether. This does not mean that we regard these other developments as unimportant. For practical reasons we have to confine our discussion to areas that have received insufficient public attention or in which we have something new to say. For example, since there are well-developed environmental and wilderness movements, we have written very little about environmental degradation or the destruction of wild nature, even though we consider these to be highly important.


There is a group of wannabe "warrior society" that takes a "by any means necessary" approach to "defending mother earth." The group declines to participate in the democratic process, preferring instead to damage, disable, and destroy the property of its ever-growing list of enemies. EF! targets include, but are by no means limited to, loggers, ranchers, and farmers -- especially those who grow genetically modified crops. Earth First!ers' crimes include assault, arson, and untold acts of sabotage. ( from the Earth First web page http://www.activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm/oid/271 ) That seem to take the last paragraph above and are trying to live it.

Here are some quotes form rather famous, so called intelligent, well known people. Their quotes are related directly to the opening paragraphs in red.

I think it is man made. I think it's clearly man made. If you don't understand what the cause is, it's virtually impossible to come up with a solution. We know what the cause is. The cause is man made. That's the cause. That's why the polar icecap is melting. Joe Biden

Business is recognizing the role it can play in combating climate change. Thank God, is all I can say, for there is a desperately urgent need for business to play that role. Your lobbying influence can be substantial, but together, united and in large enough numbers it could prove decisive in turning the tide. Prince Charles

Renewable energy is proven technology, the price is dropping, the rest of the world is going that way, that's where our investment should be going as well. Bob Brown

If the firms that employ an increasing majority of the population are driven solely to satisfy the owner's greed at the expense of working conditions, of the stability of the community, and of the health of the environment, chances are that the quality of our lives will be worse than it is now. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi

There are many who still do not believe that global warming is a problem at all. And it's no wonder: because they are the targets of a massive and well-organized campaign of disinformation lavishly funded by polluters who are determined to prevent any action to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming out of a fear that their profits might be affected if they had to stop dumping so much pollution into the atmosphere. Al Gore

Do you see a pattern here. A common thread that goes from the first red paragraphs to the quotes. Technology is evil and man is the cause of wrongs. That there should be a change, call for a new structure and appreciation to nature?

Now here is the part I found shocking. If you consider the fact that the man who wrote the first paragraphs has been deemed by psychologists, psychiatrists, members of the F.B.I, and many others to be certifiable crazy. Does it not seem strange that these others who share the same position of technology and the environment are considered to be progressive and deep thinkers?

So who wrote the words I relate these progressives to? It is a man who who was on the F.B.I most wanted list and terrorised this nation for years. It is Theodore Kaczynski the Unabomber.

It is the first five paragraphs from his manifesto. ( http://cyber.eserver.org/unabom.txt )

I have to ask then. If Ted kaczynski is a nutbag, then why are these others not considered nutbags and possible murders to be?