http://www.thecourier.com/manifest.htm

The man was thinking a lot. The text is too big, but the message is mostly quite reasonable and well thought, not a usual kind of the paranoidal survivalist thought on the edge of sanity. Angry white male was seeking the source of the modern and possibly his own misery. To be sold out by your own brother, that must have hurt. Oh well, at least the author of such a manifesto could expect nothing but the betreyal.

So are you celebrating this terrorist?

I tried reading that thing, the guy had a few issues.. namely he took common concepts and turned them into a sick fantasy world only he understood. This is clearly why he bombed the places he did.

So are you celebrating this terrorist?

Celebrating? Hell, one must be responsible for the deaths of thousands and up to be celebrated in this world. Unabomber doesn't stand a chance. I just point to the guy's writings, which bear the mark of the time. He could have killed a guy, but at least he had a capacity (and desire) to think about the world around him, causes and consequences, trends... which most people (who never killed directly) never do.

He's a moron. Sure, technological advancement has cause alot of suffering, but lack of technological advancement also causes suffering.

I tried reading that thing, the guy had a few issues.. namely he took common concepts and turned them into a sick fantasy world only he understood. This is clearly why he bombed the places he did.
I didn't find much fantasy in his words, we just have learnt not to pay attention and don't feel those things. Societary selection in its best.

He's a moron. Sure, technological advancement has cause alot of suffering, but lack of technological advancement also causes suffering.
Sure, technological advances could be implemented in the only one, the worst possible, the most degrading and I'm afraid suicidal way. There are no other ways not to live in a cave, which most of us haven't try to judge.

There is no way to manifest his manifesto without causing even greater suffering. His chosen methods were obviously inadequate and cowardly. I do sympathize with his criticism of technology and the advancement of civilizations, but he doesn't offer any credible solution.

Terence McKenna: I’m mistrustful of the dynamic at work in high technology, but you’ve probably heard me quote the French sociologist Jacques Ellul, who said, "There are no political solutions, only technological ones; the rest is propaganda." I believe that. I feel a commitment to democratic pluralism, but other than that political solutions seem fraught with difficulties. I believe in what I call a forward escape, meaning that you can’t go back and you can’t stand still, so you’ve got to go forward and technology is the way to do this. Technology is an extension of the human mental world, and it’s certainly where our salvation is going to come from; we cannot return to the hunter-gatherer pastoralism of 15,000 years ago.

Well, what these new technologies are doing is dissolving boundaries. The nation state, the monolithic party, and the nuclear family---all boundary-defined institutions of one sort or another---are legacies of the past; what we need is an ideology that is mercurial, shifting, non-static. And as long as we’re talking about mercury and mercurial things, there is in alchemy (a pre-modern form of thinking) the idea of the Coincidencia Oppositorum, which means that you have to have ideologies which are able to accommodate positions which within the context of the previous ideology would’ve appeared contradictory. The very notion of non-contradiction is a notion that emerges out of the linear, print-created mindset; the whole sterility of that world-view is its inability to live with the presence of contradiction. And so it denies it, which creates the unconscious of a society where we’ve got serial killers running around. The world is not as simple as we desperately wish to make it within the context of the linear world-view.