"Industrial Society and Its Future"

Are Neechey, Ted and Elliott /our guys/?

>Elliot
No, this is an older board with plenty of women
>Ted
definitely

Depends. Everything in the manifesto is more or less sound thinking. As for the bombings, he seemed to know that he'd cause no change in the course of human 'progress' but he tried anyway. I don't know if that's admirable or mad. Ivan Illich and Jacques Ellul were able to find audiences without bombs, but then they never changed anything either.

10 points for effort but I don't know enough to say whether the contents of the manifesto was really any good.

It becomes self sustaining,right?
The working class will be disposed somehow.
Either with the use of force,or with monetary compensation. (Free money for existing and stuff,what is it called?)

>(Free money for existing and stuff,what is it called?)
universal basic income?

...

That.
But I doubt the capitalists would be happy to give up even a fraction of their profits.
It would be foolish.
The other thing I could imagine happening is a new Luddite movement.

But taxing the hell out of automated work would help keeping up the status quo temporarily.

hello frogtwitter

i keep seeing uncle ted threads here, makes me happy

I don't get primitivists. First of all, even if you were able to overthrow industrial civilization, how would you ever be able to insure it never returned without any means of maintaining mass literacy? Oh, and more importantly, wouldn't everyone just die when our suns burns out?

/pol/ has a 1950's morality. On sexual mores. What have you. They also have a 1950's view on labour too. "Just get a fucking job and stop being lazy!!!"

Truly, these people are so stuck in their grandparents youth it's not even fucking funny anymore.

The wagecucks don't speak for all of /pol/.

Fully Automated Luxury Aryan Space Communism > (((1950s Conservatism)))

>everyone will die when sun burns out
this is a dumb argument because you can use it to say any argument is irrelevant. society exists in context, we can criticize it

"The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race" is extremely underutilized for memeing.

Kaczynski isn't really literature but I think the manifesto is pretty great. If you can read his manifesto and not agree with at least some of what he's saying you're the problem in the world

No, you can't. Every other political ideology, from liberalism to Marxism to literal Nazism, is pro-space colonization and pro-using-tech-to-make-sure-we-don't-die. Primitivists are the only ones who think it's a good idea for us to destroy all technological progress and effectively crawl on all fours for a few thousand years until we inevitably go extinct due to our abandonment of technology.

People forget that Ted Kaczynski was an actual genius. Being involved in those Murray psych experiments where he broke down the participants pretty harshly probably didn't help his psyche though. I mean being involved in a psychological experiment that so harshly attacks your ego and sense of self in your late teens probably has a very serious effect on a person.

Yes

Atleast in democratic countries the poor would probably try to sue for some sort of UBI or atleast to be provided basic amenities for survival such as food, clothing, shelter as a fundemntal right of citizens. Either way we're going to be working with an impossibly small upper class and an impossibly large lower class. We'll call it neo-feudalism or something to that effect. Hopefully people pick that term up, I'd like to brag about coining it in the future.

>inevitably go extinct
This will happen no matter what. Your timeline extends all the way to the death of our son, but does not account for the supposed end of the universe?
Speaking from where and when you're sitting, the two things might as well be the same event. It's so far out in the future

>Aryan
Good luck when an chunk of civilization dies of some disease that no one can genetically resist. Populations are nost sucsessful when extremely diverse. America might not have the smartest, the tallest, the strongest, but not one country has so many of all three of those qaulities in spades aside from America.

With workforce out of the picture,couldn't the holders of the production materials (Grain,Wood,Metals and Fossil Fuels) be the next great enemy of the producers?

>Populations are nost sucsessful when extremely diverse.

Can this myth fucking die already.
Populations are the most diverse at the height and right before the fall, yes.
Stop selling this bullshit idea that a low-trust society with constant clashing of values is going to be beneficial in the long run.

America was up until the hippie era a WASP-y place. And its presidents and the rest of its leadership were mostly Northern European. It wasn't a country of immigrants in the sense that everyone could come. The preference was clearly European.

He is an idiot, he should have gone to an independent publisher and telling he was a victiom of MK ULTRA instead of killing people.

But yes, he was.

The irish were treated the same way as chinese and mexican immigrants during there first influx to america. America has always had people who were racist, even to europeans.

My suspicion is that consumption will be transformed into labor. You see this happening with advertising, where a consumer is reimbursed for watching ads by granting them special deals or token currency (like on twitch where you get bits for voluntarily viewing ads).

If full automation does occur, universal basic income will probably follow. Producing a product doesn't matter unless people can afford it.

Which again proves my point. It was a WASP-y place.
The whole idea that America was so accepting of diversity because it looked at society like a functionalist sociologist is fucking retarded and is cheap history told at colleges in intro classes.

The heat death of the universe is only a hypothesis, and even then, we're talking about literally over a quadrillion years in the future, so this leaves open the possibility for us to do something about it, however quixotic that seems with our current understanding of science and technology.

Yes, I will inevitably die, but I'm not an emotionally stunted solipsist, so I'm capable of thinking of people other than myself and a future that extends beyond my lifespan.

I just don't understand your motives or goals, at all. If you've given up on progress of any kind and completely resigned yourself to the idea that humanity will die out, what do you (or anyone else) gain by doing this? If you want to live like a yeoman farmer, or medieval peasant, or even a fucking cave man, no one's stopping you. You can throw out your desktop computer and smartphone and go live innawoods somewhere doing whatever fucked up weirdo hermit shit you're into. Why condemn humanity to a fate that could have been avoided? I'm having trouble articulating it exactly, but this just sounds like the most insane shit ever. "Ah, yes, modern technological society makes life easy and strips it of its purpose. Yes, getting rid of it will insure many starve and die of curable diseases and so forth, but at least we won't feel atomized and without purpose while we needlessly suffer and condemn our species to extinction so we can LARP as savages more authentically."

where can you go to live like that? Kaczynski wanted to, and tried to, but eventually turned to violence because the modern world still encroached on him. there's no frontier left to explore. this is it.

I think you're missing the point, he's trying to make.

Italians, Germans, Irish and other immigrant communities have managed to integrate into an "American" culture after generations of discrimination and persecution.

With enough interaction, inter-marriage, with enough time passing to forget the "old ways" any culture can be synthesized into another.

I think the only real debate is whether there must be an "other" who is kept at a distance and exploited. Does capitalism function without importing cheap goods and labor and exporting violence and trash to the 3rd world. Can cultural synthesis occur on a global level?

It's certainly not a guaranteed outcome, a global capitalist mono-culture, but it seems at least possible.

Of course this could all be derailed by war or famine, climate change, a negative technological singularity, a super disease, or any number of potential disasters.

neo-Luddite... sums it up

>where can you go to live like that?

There are people stopping you from buying a cabin and living off the grid?

>there's no frontier left to explore. this is it.

We haven't even explored the entire ocean of our planet, much less the universe.

>Italians, Germans, Irish and other immigrant communities have managed to integrate into an "American" culture after generations of discrimination and persecution.

And I SAID that the preference was clearly for Europeans, with Northern (protestant) Europeans at the top of the pyramid.

>With enough interaction, inter-marriage, with enough time passing to forget the "old ways" any culture can be synthesized into another.

No it can't. One culture always dominates. Cfr. Supra.
And in the case of America, most of the meeting of cultures were, again, European. Which are at least a bit easier to 'marry' than European and Near Eastern cultures. Especially when they have a significant number.
Also, American protestants were extremely paranoid about Catholics ( Irish and Italians ) because it could mean a papal influence in politics. They wanted to assure the evangelical element kept sway

>I think the only real debate is whether there must be an "other" who is kept at a distance and exploited.

Capitalism will function until it goes off the rails and it'll be a Mad Max world. End of story.
You have to be a real ideologue to be so delusional to even assume you can squeeze a better world out of a tragedy. Never happened. Recovery after a fall is always a bad thing and an arduous process of getting one's proverbial shit together. Individually and collectively.

>Can cultural synthesis occur on a global level?

It can in the cities. The nodes in the global/cosmopolitan web of economic and cultural exchange.
But only in the cities.
And the recent elections demonstrate that this is clearly the case. The divide between the urban and the countryside will only grow.
That's when you get dumbasses like Tim Wise urging these people to completely abandon large swaths of rural land in America to move to the cities like 19th century proletariat.

>it's an "user grew up on too much sci-fi and thinks we'll be colonizing space before we kill ourselves off" episode

Entirely possible, but striving for something is always better than giving up. This is also a weird take for a primitivist. You can't adopt the cynical "we'll never change anything" posture and then talk about overthrowing industrial civilization which would require all of humanity to collectively sacrifice modern comforts and luxuries for a lifestyle they would never choose for themselves and that in all likelihood would consider a terrible punishment.

has anyone written on humanity's failure to explore space? I think that could be interesting

>it's an "user decides humanity is likely doomed so he does something stupid to ensure they're definitely doomed and also suffer from unnecessary misery and death all the while ungratefully shitting all over all his ancestors' accomplishments and sacrifices" episode

>No it can't. One culture always dominates. Cfr. Supra.
>And in the case of America, most of the meeting of cultures were, again, European.

But it was only through the meeting of these cultures that the concept of "European" came into existence. As the "cultural distance" between people shrinks, new categories emerge to bind them together. There was no "Italy" or "Germany" until those fiefdoms unified into nation states.

I agree that one culture reigns supreme, the point I'd make is that as the cultural distance shrinks, the separate cultures synthesize into a new one. Today the only difference between an Irish-American and a German-American are the periodic LARPing events like "Irish Fest" and St. Patrick's Day. Coexistance occurs when the differences become irrelevant. I think this could occur between any cultures, given enough time and proximity.

>Capitalism will function until it goes off the rails and it'll be a Mad Max world. End of story.
>You have to be a real ideologue to be so delusional to even assume you can squeeze a better world out of a tragedy.

I agree that capitalism could go off the rails into a new "dark age" or sorts. A global apartheid or sorts.

But this is far from the only possibility. I'd argue you have to be a "real ideologue to be so delusional" to think that capitalism must end in disaster. Its only one possibility.

Capitalism seems extremely adept at crisis management, you could even argue that crisis management is it's prefered mode of functioning.

There are a lot of theorists who argue against your position of the "inevitable collapse". This is the core idea behind Baudrillard's "The year 2000 will never take place", that capitalism will continually defer the disaster into the future, with no millenarian eschaton ever occuring, a slow motion disaster that never reaches it's culmination.

Another alternative is the theory outlined in "To Our Friends" by the Invisibile Comittee. They argue against the "inevitable collapse" theory by saying that a crisis must be created that isn't capitalism's own construction. That if we allow capitalism to dictate the nature of it's crisis, it will manage it perfectly. Only through a duel or a challenge can capitalism be brought down.

Personally, I'm mostly aligned to Baudrillard's theory of "disaster in slow motion that never ends", but I'm not so much of an ideologue as to realize that other outcomes are possible, even some of the more fanciful sci-fi techno-libertarian notions of escaping our dying sun aboard colony ships or some other fantasy.

imagine actually wanting to inflict the dismal human race on the rest of the universe and thinking you're a good person for it

>This is also a weird take for a primitivist. You can't adopt the cynical "we'll never change anything" posture and then talk about overthrowing industrial civilization which would require all of humanity to collectively sacrifice modern comforts and luxuries for a lifestyle they would never choose for themselves and that in all likelihood would consider a terrible punishment.
when did I claim to be a primitivst or say literally any of that? I don't find space colonization realistic but i'm just yanking your chain.

primitivism that moves past a critique of society and tries to enact practical changes is legitimately insane. you might read Zerzan and think "hey this guy has some interesting things to say" before he starts talking about killing off 6.5 billion people and unlearning language and symbolic thought (presumably also while applying some instinctual death penalty to anyone who tries to cultivate a field)..

i think the key here is "political ideology". There are certainly plenty of ideologies, especially some which are called 'religious' like Buddhism and Christianity which advocate for a definitive end of time.

Reminds me of Arthur C. Clarke's "Nine Billion Names of God"

downlode.org/Etext/nine_billion_names_of_god.html

>But it was only through the meeting of these cultures that the concept of "European" came into existence.

But it's still a meme anywhere else though. Look how well the concept of "European" is doing in actual Europe.
You need some VERY close proximity of peoples ( such as in America ) and intermarriage AND a significant amount of common ground to reach that.

>I agree that one culture reigns supreme, the point I'd make is that as the cultural distance shrinks

In America, you're right, European groups managed to 'get together', but it was only them. European descent groups have gone through a long process of redefining themselves after the second half of the 20th century along secular lines and AGAINST minority groups ( particularly blacks ). Liberals try to transcend that, but they can only do so, unsurprisingly, through a position the right would call self-loathing.

>But this is far from the only possibility. I'd argue you have to be a "real ideologue to be so delusional" to think that capitalism must end in disaster. Its only one possibility.

That's the Zizekian hope. But allow me to be sceptical. Especially with the left more caught up in fighting urban center cultural crusades instead. And the ones who do realize economic justice is primary are still having the liberal block on their leg and can't move further. So they too waste their times trying to convince their wing about other topics. Which just makes the witch hunt even worse.

And Baudrillard's thesis could be true... IF it isn't for nature having the last say. Which it will. Capitalism can bribe itself a new future. But nature won't be so kind when it is pushed to its edges.

Antinatalism doesn't fit well with Primitivism. If you think humans are bad and you want to end all suffering by killing them/discouraging them from procreating, you shouldn't want them to revert to their nature state red tooth and claw and suffer the miserable uncertain existence they were forced to tolerate before they became lucky enough to lead existences comfortable enough that existential malaise could be considered a serious complaint. I don't think you've actually thought this through. I think you're just jumping from ideology to ideology to feel important and give your life meaning, and Primitivism is just the latest phase. Maybe you should go get laid or volunteer at a soup kitchen or something.

this is like the reverse of that race realism shit /pol/ talk about

What do you advocate then?

>having a coherent set of beliefs in 2017

>Antinatalism doesn't fit well with Primitivism.
lmao, if you think this you are really fucking stupid

depends on how deep you go into antinatalism tho
t. other

I have read pretty much every material available about Ted's life.

If anybody wants to know anything about his life I will try and answer.

It's a shame his life gets summarized as "genius mathematician becomes a hermit and starts bombing people to protest against technology". His life was very complex and his decisions to begin his crimes was, in my opinion, no easy decision for someone as sensitive as Ted to make.

>muh american exceptionalism
lol, you must be one of those deluded morons who think the shithole that is the united states is prosperous because it's people are special or its culture is uniquely valuable

america is rich and powerful because it's a large country with lots of natural resources, with two oceans and two weak nations for neighbours, and because it was the only industrialized nation not destroyed by the two world wars

can't wait for your garbage shopping mall of a nation to be reduced to the insignificant backwater it was meant to be

Do you honestly believe people suffered less in primitive societies than they do now? Do you honestly think antinatalism convinces any but educated oversocialized Westerners?

I'll just leave these here.

I understand he was part of a psychology experiment? He went to college at a young age and was subjected to some kind of weird verbal abuse to see what effect it would have on his confidence?

Have you actually read, or at least "scanned-through", any of the mathematical work?

i don't give a shit about reducing suffering, you abject moron, nor did i ever suggest otherwise.

man suffers and dies like all animals do. my anti-natalist position is entirely instrumental to environmentalism

opening blurb

I hate this "automation will replace poor people" meme. Yes, it will replace truck drivers and shelf stockers and burger flippers.
But, it will also replace people in the upper classes. AI can already do a better job at diagnosing diseases than college trained doctors. It's also breaking into the legal field. CEOs can also have most of their responsibilities replaced by AI. Eventually AI will make all people redundant, not just low skilled people.

...

...

...

AI will take a lot longer to develop than will machines that can operate entire factories nearly by themselves, with humans serving only as supervisors and maintenance workers. Proles will be made almost entirely useless by the economy in probably under twenty years, and after that, you'll have millions of people with no prospects of ever getting a job, ever.

Now I shut up a bit and Ted actually starts writing. This and the next page (653) are his first-ever published math article. It's basically just another way of proving a result in abstract (college level) algebra.

Ted had just turned 22 when this was published.

He attended Harvard and was selected as a participant in a psychological study intended to test and challenge the belief systems of students identified as gifted but socially difficult. About once every fortnight he met up with two psychologists posing as university staff and a grad student (Ted was only in his late teens since he was admitted early). They would debate an issue, with the grad student instructed to go from arguing his own case to mocking Ted's appearance, his poor background and so on. When Ted said hello to the mock-psychologists on campus they deliberately ignored him. It lasted three years. In his trial he described it as the "worst experience" of his life. His reasons for continuing is that he wanted to prove he could not be broken.

The math stuff I don't understand and haven't read through. I've read his manifesto and biographical details. Perhaps interesting is the fact that Ted's math scores at Harvard were actually mediocre, with a b- average. Only as a grad student in Michigan did he prove his genius in any distinct sense.

Okay, so you're an edgelord manbaby. Got it.

In the same issue, a challenge problem was issued by Kaczynski. This problem is also phrased in terms of abstract algebra, which one needs to be competent with in order to solve the problem. It's not a super-hard problem though, as many people had submitted solutions one year later...

>making peace with the inevitability of mortality is "edgy"
behold, the psyche of the plastic-souled

>He attended Harvard and was selected as a participant in a psychological study intended to test and challenge the belief systems of students identified as gifted but socially difficult. About once every fortnight he met up with two psychologists posing as university staff and a grad student (Ted was only in his late teens since he was admitted early). They would debate an issue, with the grad student instructed to go from arguing his own case to mocking Ted's appearance, his poor background and so on. When Ted said hello to the mock-psychologists on campus they deliberately ignored him. It lasted three years. In his trial he described it as the "worst experience" of his life. His reasons for continuing is that he wanted to prove he could not be broken.

This shit sounds totally fucked up. You've got an already anti-social mathematics savant, and now you're going to psychologically abuse him from a position of authority. I don't think it totally excuses his murders, but it gives you an idea for why he became so obsessed with seeking revenge against academics.

It was study, so there were other test subjects right? Has anyone else spoken out about what they endured as part of the experiment? I'm guessing Ted was the only one to become a mass murderer, but I doubt the rest have positive feelings about the situation.

This what you want to read after Ted K.

The development of automation is noting like the enclosure movement (which occurred in the 17th-18th century). Britain had colonies back then to send the unnecessary surplus agricultural population to where they could farm while keeping just enough to keep wages down, that's not the case today.

Total automation would mean wages wouldn't exist therefore capital (in the sense Marx conceptualized it) and profit wouldn't exist and there wouldn't be any basis for a price system. But what you're describing is just sci-fi for the near future, capitals goal is more modest to just create the maximum dequalification of the maximum proportion of manual labourers while it seeks to produce the maximum skill in the smallest possible proportion of mental labourers.

>ie, what happens when walmart (who employs 1% of the nation) fires 5/8 of its workforce and replaces 1/25 of that with highly trained technicians.
Deploying a significant degree of automation suddenly in the service sector would mean their profits crash since a large portion of their consumers are employed in the service sector.
>Reminder that there are many towns where Walmarts and Mcdonalds are top employers.
You're just describing a lot of rural communities which fundamentally just aren't viable without being propped up by welfare and government transfers... communities founded just around extracting a staple commodity, something like coal, etc, won't survive if the price collapses.... look at what happened to a lot of cities in Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union, it would be similar to that without transfer payments.

...as seen here. This one solution (and credit to others) appeared summer 1965, a year after the problem was originally stated.

That's 3/12 so far. I'm going to skip a bit now and just provide straight-up text links to seven of the remaining ten, where they exist (see above for context on links)

iumj.indiana.edu/IUMJ/FULLTEXT/1965/14/14039
projecteuclid.org/download/pdf_1/euclid.mmj/1031732782
search.proquest.com/docview/288225414
zariski.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/2689056.pdf
ams.org/journals/tran/1969-137-00/S0002-9947-1969-0236393-5/S0002-9947-1969-0236393-5.pdf
ams.org/journals/tran/1969-141-00/S0002-9947-1969-0243078-8/S0002-9947-1969-0243078-8.pdf
ams.org/journals/proc/1969-023-02/S0002-9939-1969-0248339-X/S0002-9939-1969-0248339-X.pdf

Almost all of these links are Kaczynski's "serious" mathematics (the stuff I just posted was his younger warm-up stuff, cutting his teeth proving that he can publish and be an active, working mathematician). They deal with boundary functions and related topics, objects of study in complex analysis (very roughly speaking: doing math and calculus with complex numbers, as opposed to real numbers). This stuff covers 1965-1969, and is directly related to Kaczynski's doctoral work, which was focused on same. Kaczynski draws on his own work from paper to paper, so he actually begins citing himself a handful of times, especially toward the end (1969).

The one oddball in the group is a little "easier" cute note on number theory that Kaczynski put out; that is the "zariski" link.

So that makes 10/12, so far. I'll just wrap up with my transcription of the last two items, a similar "problem/solution" cycle over about a year, to the one just seen.

This problem is also fairly "cute". It can be understood by a general audience (depite some less-than-perfect phrasing), although the proofs are more involved.

It's also rather cute in the sense that Kaczynski poses a math problem involving "match sticks". The imagination goes to obvious places.

This. I'm not a neo-luddite but he was spot on wit the state of the world, just didn't have a good solution.

Just ignore this, it's noise that I wanted to get for completeness.

>just didn't have a good solution.
who does

Kaczynski's problem...

dude can you just do a zip file or something?

And two solutions.

Kaczynski's mathematics can thus be summarized as follows: some early algebra, some light bits of number theory and geometry throughout, and the bulk, being the "serious", "hard" stuff, extends complex analysis somewhat.

The Foundation for Exploration by Sean Goonan

looks like an obscure ebook nobody's read

are you this Sean Goonan yourself?

You're right, but it shouldn't be obscure. Unbelievable the way the world works. The people that are right have to send out bombs to get their voice heard, and then nobody cares anyways. Pretty sad.

No. [Insert cute blurb about zip files being a bridge-too-far, a tool of leftists] :^)

I'm almost done anyway.

I want to make two more points while on the topic: First, the link to Kaczynski's PhD thesis itself is a FRAGMENT. There are apparently university libraries out east that have hard copies, but I haven't been able to discover the whole thing online. I will therefore award One Full Internet to an user who either sees and copies (photography?) Michigan's microfilm, or otherwise copies one of the other (apparently per worldcat) surviving texts and uploads it sometime.

If you live near any of THESE libraries (Ann Arbor, D.C. area), then I want you to go to one and look it up, copy it, and post it on the internet somewhere, preferably somewhere where I can access it:

worldcat.org/title/boundary-functions/oclc/34661830

Second point: Throughout the above papers, Kaczynski cites 30 distincts sources (several more than once), for a total of 41 citations (not counting whatever citations the dissertations has, which has to have lots of overlap). Kaczynski cites himself a few times, but no one else (so far as I know) ever cites his "serious" work, so it's arguably not impactful just by having no citations (that I know of).

Again, so far as I know, exactly one paper with an author OTHER than Kaczynski, actually cites any of Kaczynski's math. And it cites his little note about number theory: that paper is here:

arxiv.org/pdf/math/0511366v2.pdf

There were other test subjects, but the public documents from the time, which his brother and his legal team researched, are heavily redacted. I don't think anybody has spoken out about them, but this was a period when the government was funding a ton of pscychological studies that would be considered unethical today.

No one cares about the math of Ted K, give it a rest. We care about the future of our industrial society and the writing surrounding it.

Both Ted Kaczynski and Adam Lanza desired a return to a primitive state of living "in the wild". Both also suffered from sensory disorders, in Ted's case he hated loud sounds (he tied ropes around trees in his area to injure motorcyclists, and hated the sound of smashing glass) and in Adam's case he had sensory processing disorder, and also hated sunlight.

He hated those sounds because of what the represented and because they detract from a peaceful state of being in wonder and contemplation and being in touch with nature, reality, and the universe. I hate loud disruptive industrial noises as well, doesn't mean I have a Jew diagnosed "sensory disorder".

But Adam was diagnosed with that by a doctor, he didn't only find traffic noise kind of annoying. Ted hated the sound of smashed glass, which is why his brother and others were so surprised to discover that he had broken his way into a house in the area via a window and used an axe to smash the interior because he didn't like the sound of the family's snowmobiles.

psychology exists almost entirely to pathologize any behaviour outside that of the optimal consumer-worker drone

You are trying to paint Kaczynski as some clueless autist who developed his worldview around his sensory disorder.

>Elliot Rodger's manifesto
>"BUAAAHH WHY WOMEN DON'T LIKE? ME BUAAAAAHHH"
Even my diary is better than that shit.

You get rid of all those useless proletariats and start a communist utopia composed exclusively of bourgeois and some prolets who know how to handle the robots (of course they will given the title of citizenship and treated as part of society too).
Marx was right all along, we just didn't wanted to see the consequences of his statements.

lol, hates loud noises, resentful towards the academy for sussing out his latent homosexualism

bombs airports (flyovers being the one industrial noise he can't escape) and universities

whom could follow the byzantine concavities of such soul

I also love that Penthouse offered to publish his manifesto but he felt it wasn't prestigious enough, so his compromise was he would send off one more bomb.