Analysis of the Unabomber’s Manifesto (Part 1)

Introduction

In this series of articles, I will make an attempt to introduce the reader to Theodore John Kaczynski’s — also known as the Unabomber — mind through his manifesto which he single-handedly wrote inside his cabin. I will present the most important and profound, in my perspective, ideas that can be found inside his manifesto along with my personal point of view, whether positive or negative, in regards to these very ideas.

Although I certainly do not agree with Kaczynski’s methods and practices I will try to remain as objective as possible using logic and reason to deconstruct some of Kaczynski’s arguments while I will point out some notions of his that I find interesting. Please read the article with an open mind and do not let your emotions and ethics cloud your judgment. I am the first one to condemn his murders and terrorist attacks but let’s put our emotions aside for a few minutes and use logic in order to analyze his idealogy.

But before we dive into his manifesto, who exactly was Ted Kaczynski and why is his ideology more relevant than ever in today’s world?

The Man Behind The Manifesto

Ted Kaczynski was born on May 22, 1942, in Chicago, Illinois, to working-class parents of Polish descent. From a very early age, he showed exceptional abilities in mathematics. This was the reason why he entered Harvard on a scholarship in 1958 at age 16. Kaczynski received his bachelor's degree from Harvard and continued his studies to get a master’s and a doctoral degree from Michigan University where he specialized in geometric function theory. Seems pretty innocent right?

Well as it turns out, this great mathematician went on to become the subject of the longest and most expensive investigation in the history of the FBI up to that point.

To quote from Wikipedia:

In 1969, Kaczynski abandoned his career to pursue a primitive life. Between 1978 and 1995, he killed three people and injured 23 others in a nationwide bombing campaign against people he believed to be advancing modern technology and the destruction of the environment.

That escalated quickly didn’t it? What could lead a man to do something like this and what were his goals?

Okay, without further ado, let’s now dive into his so-called manifesto and see what his hatred towards technology was all about.

Kaczynski’s Manifesto

His 35.000-word essay called “Industrial Society and Its Future” is a social critique opposing industrialization and a pure ode to nature-centered anarchism. Whether you agree with his ideology or not, his essay is a very well-written document with a strong logical underlying structure — to be expected from someone who has a Ph.D. in theoretical mathematics — and train of thought. Even the logical fallacies that we believe that Kaczynski committed are not so easy to spot. Apart from that, some of the points that he is making are hard to argue against. But let’s take a closer look.

“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.”

Kaczynski makes his ideology clear from the very beginning. We presented this part so that the reader can understand the core of the Unabomber’s mindset. Although we do agree up to a degree, as we will explain later on, that the frantic development of technology may indeed be correlated with increased stress, Kaczynski appears very absolute from the get-go in failing to recognize the positive impact of the industrial revolution on the human race.

“Almost everyone will agree that we live in a deeply troubled society. One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism.”

“When we speak of leftists in this article we have in mind mainly socialists, collectivists, “politically correct” types, feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists, and the like. But not everyone who is associated with one of these movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing leftism is not so much movement or an ideology as a psychological type, or rather a collection of related types.”

“The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call “feelings of inferiority” and “over-socialization”. Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while over-socialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential.”

“Leftists” play an important role in Kaczynski’s manifesto. Under this term, he is trying to group certain people based on some psychological traits — namely the “feelings of inferiority” and “over-socialization” — that they all, as he believes, share.

Kaczynski believes that our societies are deeply troubled in the sense that there exists unprecedented psychological suffering on an individual level. On this ground, “leftism” as he defines it, is a direct product of this very suffering that starts from a young age.

Note that throughout his manifesto he never clearly states who counts a “leftist” or not. Rather, he gives certain guidances to help “non-leftists” identify “leftists” when they encounter them.

“By “feelings of inferiority” we mean not only inferiority feelings in the strict sense but a whole spectrum of related traits; low self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness, depressive tendencies, defeatism, guilt, self-hatred, etc.”

“When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said about him (or about groups with whom he identifies) we conclude that he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem.”

“He wants society to solve every one’s problems for them, satisfy everyone’s needs for them, take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense of confidence in his ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs. The leftist is antagohistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser.”

In these passages, Kaczynski is basically critiquing the hypersensitivity of our time. While it is true that hypersensitivity is becoming more and more prominent in our world there is a very fine line which we must not cross.

By the term hypersensitive, we refer to those individuals who interpret as derogatory almost anything that is said about them or about groups with whom they identify.

No one can deny the fact that these kinds of reactions are very prominent in today’s societies or at least much more common than say, two decades ago.

But is this a bad thing?

Here is probably the first general criticism we have regarding Kaczynski’s manifesto. As we have already established, his underlying logic is hard to crack so, in most cases, we will limit our analysis to more general principles.

Life is not black and white.

It is true that we live in sensitive times. Everyone seems to be offended by anything these days. What we have to understand, however, is that this is a byproduct of years and years of oppression, shaming, and discrimination of certain groups of individuals. Gays, for example, were mocked and thought of as “the black sheep” of societies not too long ago. We have grown culturally as a society, however — in a short period of time — and, for the most part, these discriminating notions are now frowned upon.

But this did not just happen. There are a few factors that contributed to this social growth. Education, cultivation of free-thinking, the Internet just to name a few. But the most important factor is the protests, struggles, and fights — in a metaphorical sense — that gays participated in order to show the world that they should not be treated differently. And all the non-gay people that supported them deserve as much credit as them for helping in this cause. Without, some sort of “loud measures” and yes, even a little bit of hypersensitivity for this once controversial matter, I am not so sure we would have made such a rapid progression.

Do not get me wrong. I am the first one to get annoyed when I see unnecessary hypersensitivity in the everyday life. Sometimes, it feels like that you cannot freely talk around certain individuals. And while I do agree with Kaczynski that any kind of extreme defensiveness and sensitivity in any subject hides certain psychological issues — not to call them problems — underneath, I do not agree with his “absolute” way of thinking. Failing to distinguish between collective benign support towards a group that needs our help and extreme defensiveness and offensive hypersensitivity towards everyone and everything is a characteristic of his manifesto.

This is the first article in this series. Not much analysis was given here as we intended to give some backstory of Kaczynski so that the reader can get an all-around picture of this man and his ideology which is expressed clearly through his manifesto. We will focus solely on his manifesto from the following articles.