*”Anti-Technology Extremsists” (Neo-Luddites) Added to the Terrorist List.

Posted: May 6, 2009 in 2009, Exclusives
Tags: , ,

The new Homeland Security “Lexicon” document has been making rounds, and many others have noted the “Anti-Technology Extremsists” (ATE) portion. I’d like to explain what that is all about, and my answer to the related Unabomber Manifesto.

Here’s the quote from the document:

A movement of groups or individuals opposed to technology. These groups have been known to advocate or engage in criminal activity and plot acts of violence and terrorism in an attempt to advance their extremist goals. They have targeted college and university laboratories, scholars, biotechnology industries, U.S. corporations involved in the computer or airline industry, and others.
(also: Neo-Luddites)

Neo-Luddites:

The Luddite Movement began in the 1800’s in light on the ‘new’ machines of that day replacing jobs that used to be done manually by humans. The ‘founder’ was a actually a folklore character named Ned Ludd. During their heyday machines were vandalized and so on. Eventually it fizzled out.

Despite Ned Ludd being fictional, Neo-Eugenecist Ray Kurzweil claims that Ned Ludd wasn’t prosecuted because he was in Kurzweil’s own words “feeble minded”, on page 125 in his book “The Age of Spiritual Machines”. That term is specifically the same term used roughly in the Luddite period by Eugenecists to justify forced sterilizations and even death for the “feebleminded”.

The “Neo-Luddite Movement” is widely projected to be symbolized by the Unabomber (Ted Kaczynski, Ph.D.) in circles who criticize the movement, although the masses at large hardly rememer anything about what he stood for while HLS is now labeling Neo-Luddites as violent terrorists.

Kurzweil actually quotes a most daunting section from the Unabomber Manifesto that went largely ignored and is most eye-opening:

172. First let us postulate that the computer scientists succeed in developing intelligent machines that can do all things better that human beings can do them. In that case presumably all work will be done by vast, highly organized systems of machines and no human effort will be necessary. Either of two cases might occur. The machines might be permitted to make all of their own decisions without human oversight, or else human control over the machines might be retained.

173. If the machines are permitted to make all their own decisions, we can’t make any conjectures as to the results, because it is impossible to guess how such machines might behave. We only point out that the fate of the human race would be at the mercy of the machines. It might be argued that the human race would never be foolish enough to hand over all the power to the machines. But we are suggesting neither that the human race would voluntarily turn power over to the machines nor that the machines would willfully seize power. What we do suggest is that the human race might easily permit itself to drift into a position of such dependence on the machines that it would have no practical choice but to accept all of the machines decisions. As society and the problems that face it become more and more complex and machines become more and more intelligent, people will let machines make more of their decision for them, simply because machine-made decisions will bring better result than man-made ones. Eventually a stage may be reached at which the decisions necessary to keep the system running will be so complex that human beings will be incapable of making them intelligently. At that stage the machines will be in effective control. People won’t be able to just turn the machines off, because they will be so dependent on them that turning them off would amount to suicide.

174. On the other hand it is possible that human control over the machines may be retained. In that case the average man may have control over certain private machines of his own, such as his car of his personal computer, but control over large systems of machines will be in the hands of a tiny elite — just as it is today, but with two difference. Due to improved techniques the elite will have greater control over the masses; and because human work will no longer be necessary the masses will be superfluous, a useless burden on the system. If the elite is ruthless the may simply decide to exterminate the mass of humanity. If they are humane they may use propaganda or other psychological or biological techniques to reduce the birth rate until the mass of humanity becomes extinct, leaving the world to the elite. Or, if the elite consist of soft-hearted liberals, they may decide to play the role of good shepherds to the rest of the human race. They will see to it that everyone’s physical needs are satisfied, that all children are raised under psychologically hygienic conditions, that everyone has a wholesome hobby to keep him busy, and that anyone who may become dissatisfied undergoes “treatment” to cure his “problem.” Of course, life will be so purposeless that people will have to be biologically or psychologically engineered either to remove their need for the power process or to make them “sublimate” their drive for power into some harmless hobby. These engineered human beings may be happy in such a society, but they most certainly will not be free. They will have been reduced to the status of domestic animals.

In his total works he proposes destroying the system and moving into the wild as the only solution to our own problem child.

He might be right about it being the only total solution. I’ve taken on the view that it might be possible to stop the New World Order, but not the technology. But if we do stop the NWO there’s a chance to setback AGI and the Technological Singularity by several decades as these are deliberate agendas whereas these events will not come about in the next few years without such an effort. As it stands society is nowhere near being ready for such a transition, and havent even been consulted as to if its even a road we want to go down.

So the best case scenarios to stop Kaczynski’s nightmare is total chaos ridden systematic and societal breakdown which would inherently result in a massive ‘culling’ of the populations of the idustrialized world, or a global dictatorship to control the advancement of technology. Ironically we’re already facing each disaster ‘solution’ being engineered by the architects of the NWO, although they’re attepting to bankrupt us in order to stop us from being able to afford the advanced technologies for ourselves.

I propose another solution: Stop the NWO now, and then move off into “Neo-Amish” cities of humans. These wouldnt be total counter-technology based domains like todays Amish, instead we can still have the technologies and such that we’re all used to except we’ve all chosen to remain as non-upgraded or nanobot / microchip implanted autonomous individual humans not inteterested in the Transhumanist world that would view us as obsolete sub-humans who would try to get us to join the their collective, in a system where we wouldn’t be able to compete with them and the AGI machines for jobs anyways.

Under this solution global scale class and species warfare like never before will still be inevitable after a long enough time, but we’ll be able to live good lives for however many decades that would buy us.

Advertisements
Comments
  1. Thanks for sharing your very intuitive thoughts. It continues to amaze me how oblivious of the obvious people are. Must be their programming, huh? And thanks for Kaczynski’s comments – I never realized how perceptive he was. I will now have to read his Manifesto.

  2. Psh says:

    Thank you for your interesting article. Learned a lot new to subscribe to your news. I would wait for new articles. Good luck.

  3. gegenism says:

    you…good article

  4. Michael says:

    Maybe I’m missing something, but what would be bad about upgrading humans via computer chips, nanobots, or whatever? And what would be bad about a world unified under a single government? Would certainly cut down on war.

    • In a society where the leaders keep the best interests of their people in mind – nothing. But here the planet is run by a bunch of thugs whose principal interests are to plunder and enslave – thus both will be used to ensure that agenda.

  5. gegen says:

    so what’s the neo-luddites official website??
    hehe just kidding

    • ignoranceisntbliss says:

      Right here! haha

      Actually, tho, I couldnt live without technology. It’s even my industry. But this madness over merging with machines and machines ruling the world is perhaps humanities worst nightmare, and potentially more irreversible than even a nuclear war. Definitely the worst nightmare of the Luddites, as they were apparently opposed to pretty much all mechanical industrial technology of their time. Ol’ Ted is too.

      The Transhumanists would surely call me a Neo-Luddite, but my view on the phrase, if to not be taken as a derogatory label, wouldn’t be the opposition of all technology, but more in the terms I’ve explained above. Ted would be an old Luddite, whereas under my description in the blog that would be the neo (new) Luddites. Although I’m not even sure I like that label being attached to my ideals.

  6. gegen says:

    technology in the light of mine is “tool” to make everything easier…
    so whats wrong with that??

  7. ignoranceisntbliss says:

    But it can also be used for enslavement.

  8. gegenism says:

    so let’s just focus to “how to make technology not used for enslavement”…

    don’t sacrifice the technology..

    let’s sacrifice our energy to make technology not used for enslavement…

    • ignoranceisntbliss says:

      Then I hope you’ll take the time to go thru my archives here to understand the system that is behind everything that is happening. The first step is to ‘fight’ what most call the “NWO”, the tyrannical system that dominates the globe. Then how to deal with the technology itself becomes the issue. The technology of total enslavement is still down the street, while the tyrannical system i speak of is already trying to kick down the front door. the timing of these trends should speak volumes.

  9. gegenism says:

    woo..the system..

    the “system” use technology to….

    the “system” use religion to…

    the “system” use money system to…

    like i said…let’s focus to what “behind everything”. in this case..the system itself.

  10. gegenism says:

    by the way…maybe our perception about technology is not the same..

  11. ignoranceisntbliss says:

    maybe our perception about the system isnt the same. my view is laid out across this wordpress site.

  12. john says:

    Obama IS a Luddite 100% if you can explain UAW sv. automation and where Obama sides making it such that he is on the side of progress and the fall of price. Then I am wrong, but you wont and I am right OBAMA IS a LUDDITE!!! “Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” not “Life liberty and the assistance of happiness.” WAKE UP

  13. I think the real problem with technology today, especially media for entertainment, is that it distracts and relishes people apathetic towards real political issues and injustices that are carried on around the world. No one cares about their fellow man nowadays, no one cares that the system is flawed the economy failing and literally everything around us, our planet is going to shit, as long as they have the new iphone or new television, new show, new car, new distraction which keeps everyone complacent and docile, allowing those in power to manipulate and use and destroy all semblance of a democracy for the people by the people, it makes me sick. Materialism and extreme Capitalism are the by product of a technological age of Zombies.

    • Alex says:

      You have to understand that technology determines what social system is most efficient for it’s progress provided that human values can be molded to coincide. When they don’t coincide, technology slowly molds people by a process of natural selection to embrace the values that are best suited for its advance. Socialism was more compatible with human values than with technical efficiency during the 20th century, thus capitalism prevailed because it was just a more efficient means of allowing the technological phenomenon to give us “progress” and provided a “higher standard of living.” Perhaps the technological conditions will change where it is more efficient for technology to have a socialist political system where everything is equally distributed and mediated by super-computers……HOWEVER the problem of Freedom, Autonomy, and Human dignity remain for ALL the different social arrangements that technology selects. They are all caused by Techno-Industrial Civilization, or simply the TechnoIndustrial system.

  14. Jacob Williamson says:

    Here’s one man who’s trying a different way.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s