He wasn’t drugged though…the professor had him “discuss/debate” with another “student” who was really a young prosecutor from Boston with the sole objective arguing fiercely against any perspective Ted presented, to fuck with his perception meter. But no gallons of acid for him.
I’m wondering if you’re confusing Ted K with Terence McKenna? Very dissimilar people but could be a function of reading both around the same time in your life, maybe.
If not and you remember what you’re thinking about, and it’s indeed a manifesto by a criminal ranting about elves, I’d love a name/title if you feel like sharing.
Honestly, I’ve read a lot of manifestos and writings of people without the firmest grasp on reality and they get kinda jumbled up. It might have been McKenna, it might have been the time cube guy (whose name I forget), it could have been a dmt trip report on erowid.
Took a few courses on American culture where it was notably absent. I think any course of study that starts with Eisenhower’s farewell address should end with at least a cursory look at Industrial Society - even if it means those last couple of classes are full of very heated, uncomfortable debate.
It’s an important document, regardless of how people feel about the author and what he did.
Is your favorite part where he blames liberals, commies, and academics for everything wrong with Reaganism or the part where he decides it’s the fault of women and diversity?
My favourite part is his position that you can’t restore a person’s inherent autonomy in a meaningful sense while keeping the larger sociotechnological structures that limit it in place.
Take a look at the direction of the U.S. these days, and the significant rollbacks in the limited autonomy afforded liberals, commies, academics, women, and ethnically diverse individuals either actioned or on the horizon as evidence. There’s merit to this position.
I do not agree with all of Ted’s positions - I am a collectivist, ultimately and perhaps foolishly, at heart - but I find quips like yours to be distractions. These comments certainly shouldn’t be ignored, but considered within the larger context.
That said, if these comments are such that you don’t want to engage with the rest of it, that’s your decision and I respect it. And I mean that sincerely (trying to account for Poe’s law here - I really do mean that).
If you’ve never read Ted K, I recommend it. It’s not an easy read, but he wasn’t wrong.
Maybe I’m thinking of a different manifesto, but didn’t ol’ teddy start ranting about elves and stuff towards the end of the document?
Tbh it’s been a while since I read much past the first few sections.
That said, he was MKULTRA’d real hard. I wouldn’t be too surprised if some Terrence McKenna-type weirdness snuck in there.
He wasn’t drugged though…the professor had him “discuss/debate” with another “student” who was really a young prosecutor from Boston with the sole objective arguing fiercely against any perspective Ted presented, to fuck with his perception meter. But no gallons of acid for him.
TIL
Poor Unibomber didn’t get any acid :(
I think the elves must have been someone else. Ted’s manifesto was mostly about technology being the root of society’s problems.
Yeah you’re probably thinking of McKenna. He was real into talking about the elves he met on DMT.
I prefer his “jeweled self-dribbling basketballs” to “elves”.
I’m wondering if you’re confusing Ted K with Terence McKenna? Very dissimilar people but could be a function of reading both around the same time in your life, maybe.
If not and you remember what you’re thinking about, and it’s indeed a manifesto by a criminal ranting about elves, I’d love a name/title if you feel like sharing.
Honestly, I’ve read a lot of manifestos and writings of people without the firmest grasp on reality and they get kinda jumbled up. It might have been McKenna, it might have been the time cube guy (whose name I forget), it could have been a dmt trip report on erowid.
Fair enough. No worries!
No.
I may not agree with everything he says. But it’s quite logical and well argued.
Nothing about elves. More about how technology and capitalism and neo-liberal leftism have ruined the human condition, and the need for revolution.
The mistake you’re making with ol Teddy is thinking he doesn’t know what the difference between a neoliberal and a leftist is.
Bro was nuts and blaming everything on the leeeeeeeffffftttttt in the middle of Reaganism.
Took a few courses on American culture where it was notably absent. I think any course of study that starts with Eisenhower’s farewell address should end with at least a cursory look at Industrial Society - even if it means those last couple of classes are full of very heated, uncomfortable debate.
It’s an important document, regardless of how people feel about the author and what he did.
Is your favorite part where he blames liberals, commies, and academics for everything wrong with Reaganism or the part where he decides it’s the fault of women and diversity?
My favourite part is his position that you can’t restore a person’s inherent autonomy in a meaningful sense while keeping the larger sociotechnological structures that limit it in place.
Take a look at the direction of the U.S. these days, and the significant rollbacks in the limited autonomy afforded liberals, commies, academics, women, and ethnically diverse individuals either actioned or on the horizon as evidence. There’s merit to this position.
I do not agree with all of Ted’s positions - I am a collectivist, ultimately and perhaps foolishly, at heart - but I find quips like yours to be distractions. These comments certainly shouldn’t be ignored, but considered within the larger context.
That said, if these comments are such that you don’t want to engage with the rest of it, that’s your decision and I respect it. And I mean that sincerely (trying to account for Poe’s law here - I really do mean that).