• Comrade_Spood@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 hours ago

    To all the people in the comments being like “Ted had some good points.” Judi Bari, Peter Kropotkin, and Murray Bookchin are all people who have written about environmentalism and the problems of technology, industrialization, and such and better than the reactionary psychopath did. Fascists love the unabomber and use him to normalize eco-fascism. Stop fucking saying he had good points cause there are better authors who have made those same points without all the fucking reactionary and eco-fascism tied to it.

    • CultLeader4Hire@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Uhhhhh

      Stop fucking saying he had good points cause there are better authors who have made those same points

      Doesn’t this inherently imply he does in fact have good points if they’re making the same points… you also make a good point that there’s better sources that don’t come with a ton of ideology baggage but what your saying here is yes he does have good points but read someone else saying his points instead

      • Comrade_Spood@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Yes that is what I am saying. But just because someone made some good points doesn’t mean we should keep using them as the defacto idealogue. Imagine if we kept saying “Hitler had some good points” when talking about animal rights or Osama Bin Laden for anti-imperialism. If you want an edgy thing to make a meme like this out of, use the ELF or ALF. Two groups that are controversial but lack the eco-fascism narrative of the unabomber.

    • MerryJaneDoe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      there are better authors who have made those same points without all the fucking reactionary and eco-fascism tied to it.

      Seems like a great reason to discuss Ted’s viewpoints. We should definitely discuss the ineffectual extremists. Compare and contrast. Weigh and measure. That’s what truth-seekers do. Telling people not to read a particular author borders on censorship.

      But asking people to expand their reading list and providing actual recommendations - that is wonderful and commendable. Thank you for that!

      • Comrade_Spood@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        I never said don’t read it, but comparing and contrasting is not what is happening. Its like when Osama Bin Laden’s manifesto or whatever was making the rounds and everyone was like “ya know he makes some good points.” Everyone just keeps parroting the points of far-right extremists cause they pointed out a pretty universal issue like imperialism, consumerism, environmental destruction, etc. If the only perspective that gets spread is that of a far-right nutjob, then it normalizes the problematic parts of their perspective. Its always just begins and ends with “the unabomber made some good points.” Not “the unabomber made some good points, but Bookchin is more practical and not a eco-fascist.”