Why did they make this tv show to glorify the Unabomber?

I suspect someone with influence was trying to point out shit the CIA was involved with, and possibly that the FBI was used to cover up this shit.
The show is about an FBI profiler brought in to find the Unibomber, but,
It starts with him being brought back into the FBI to get the Unibomber to NOT go to trial, because the FBI DOESN’T want the Unibomber to use the trial as a political platform.
It also has at least one episide focused on the Unibombers childhood, and more particularly his education at Harvard,
Where, he was a involved in a psychological study involving interrogation and mental torture.
The professor in charge of the psychological study was, Henry Murray, a former chief psychologist for the OSS and presumably later the CIA.
The show also pointed out hiw hard it was to track Kaczynski. Which could be do to his intelligence, or it could be do to training in intelligence “tradecraft”
The show also showed Janet Reno, who was the United States Attorney General when Kaczynski was arrested.
The show basically pointed to incompetence and possible corruption within the FBI.
And possible FBI collusion with the government or CIA to bury the evidence of a possible connection to the Unibomber and Reno in charge at the time of his arrest.
Given that Reno was connected to the Clintons, and corruption in the FBI in support of Hillary came out, and supposed ties between Hillary and the CIA, thru the State Department and other ways, it seems the show might have been ment to subtly point out those connections.

My mother was convinced in the early 90s that my father was the Unabomber. He had a contract job out in Salt Lake City when the 87 bombing happened and just happened to be up northeast when the 93 bombing happened. He was also super into the Unabomber's escapades on TV, and would talk near-obsessively about him sometimes. She seriously had ideas about it being him, especially since his skill set and his job mobility would allow him to build bombs in secret and transport them all over the country. So she was pretty relieved when they caught him.

his manifesto is more on point and relevant to us than any bullshit written by Marx, Engels or Adam Smith

Peace out to Uncle Ted

Facts

Attached: 1529411050315.png (1323x1381, 317K)

>The unabomber did nothing wrong

What did Netflix mean by this?!

Time to drop some tedpills

>In any technologically advanced society the individual’s fate MUST depend on decisions that he personallycannot influence to any great extent. A technological so-ciety cannot be broken down into small, autonomous com-munities, because production depends on the cooperationof very large numbers of people and machines. Such asociety MUST be highly organized and decisions HAVETO be made that affect very large numbers of people.When a decision affects, say, a million people, then eachof the affected individuals has, on the average, only a one-millionth share in making the decision. What usually hap-pens in practice is that decisions are made by public offi-cials or corporation executives, or by technical specialists,but even when the public votes on a decision the numberof voters ordinarily is too large for the vote of any oneindividual to be significant. [17] Thus most individualsare unable to influence measurably the major decisionsthat affect their lives. There is no conceivable way to re-medy this in a technologically advanced society. The sys-tem tries to “solve” this problem by using propaganda tomake people WANT the decisions that have been made forthem, but even if this “solution” were completely success-ful in making people feel better, it would be demeaning.

Because the unabomber was fucking right

Normies can't understand the unabomber. They're going to butcher the character to avoid having to think about anything he had to say.

Any of the foregoing symptoms can occur in anysociety, but in modern industrial society they are presenton a massive scale. We aren’t the first to mention that theworld today seems to be going crazy. This sort of thing isnot normal for human societies. There is good reason tobelieve that primitive man suffered from less stress andfrustration and was better satisfied with his way of lifethan modern man is. It is true that not all was sweet-ness and light in primitive societies. Abuse of women wascommon among the Australian aborigines, transexualitywas fairly common among some of the American Indiantribes. But it does appear that GENERALLY SPEAKING thekinds of problems that we have listed in the preceding pa-ragraph were far less common among primitive peoplesthan they are in modern society.46. We attribute the social and psychological problemsof modern society to the fact that that society requirespeople to live under conditions radically different fromthose under which the human race evolved and to be-have in ways that conflict with the patterns of behaviorthat the human race developed while living under theearlier conditions. It is clear from what we have alreadywritten that we consider lack of opportunity to properlyexperience the power process as the most important ofthe abnormal conditions to which modern society subjectspeople. But it is not the only one. Before dealing with dis-ruption of the power process as a source of social pro-blems we will discuss some of the other sources.

Memes aside, how did netflix get away with it? They straight up make him sympathetic, shit on the courts for railroading him and the final shot is of the FBI agent realizing Ted was right. And LMAO at that scene of Ted having a family at the cabin.

Among the abnormal conditions present in modernindustrial society are excessive density of population, iso-lation of man from nature, excessive rapidity of socialchange and the breakdown of natural small-scale commu-nities such as the extended family, the village or the tribe.48. It is well known that crowding increases stress andaggression. The degree of crowding that exists today andthe isolation of man from nature are consequences of tech-nological progress. All pre-industrial societies were pre-dominantly rural. The Industrial Revolution vastly increa-sed the size of cities and the proportion of the populationthat lives in them, and modern agricultural technologyhas made it possible for the Earth to support a far den-ser population than it ever did before. (Also, technologyexacerbates the effects of crowding because it puts increa-sed disruptive powers in people’s hands. For example, avariety of noise-making devices: power mowers, radios,motorcycles, etc. If the use of these devices is unrestric-ted, people who want peace and quiet are frustrated bythe noise. If their use is restricted, people who use thedevices are frustrated by the regulations. But if these ma-chines had never been invented there would have been noconflict and no frustration generated by them.)

what would ted have said about Yea Forums?

he would have loved the HONK meme

hes still alive mate just write to him and ask

It will be his magnum opus

This show was pure kino. Highly underrated

Ellul >Illich>Uncle Ted

because Ted K is unironically awesome. sorta like a modern Diogenes but with greater emphasise on killing. true legend.

Ted was a literal genius, wish he had put the mind to less destructive activity.

he probably doesn't have Internet access and wouldn't know what Yea Forums was. He probably wouldn't like it. He was anti-technology.

HE COULD BEAT JUSTIN PETERSON FOR LEADER OF THE ALT RIGHT

how many lists would you be put on if you wrote to him?

Ted thought the right was completely retarded.

Literally no one would know about his message if he didnt get the publicity, and he knew that.

Would have gotten off no problem if his beta cuck brother didnt rat him out.

All of them.

The right of 1980 and today are very different things. Im certain he would speak favorably of the tribalistic and primitive right wingers of today.

he wouldn't because those tribilistic right wingers support people like Trump who doesn't give a fuck about the natural world. Teddy would not like them because they're idiots.

>TED BEING ON THE SIDE OF LEFTOIDS AND FEMINISTS

I DONT THINK SO SWEETY

Attached: 1540570861794.jpg (688x530, 239K)

No. He wouldn't. He's even said he "supported" Obama and Hillary. Ted believes that the right wing is fundamentally incongruent. They support an economic system whose major effect is the deterritorialization of traditional communities and social mores in order to prepare the reterritorialized communities for the latest economic, social, and industrial techniques. His writings are not MUH TRIBALISM GOOD. Not to mention the complete lack of concern with climate change that emanates from the right.
Yeah. He also thought the left was missing the big picture by worrying about relatively trivial things in the face of what he saw as the greatest threat to humanity. And that it attracted a lot of weirdos. He critiqued both.

ITS A BINARY WORLD AND HE'D SIDE WITH THE RIGHT

THE ONLY ISSUE HE HAS WITH THEM IS THE ENVIRONMENT, BUT CLIMATE CHANGE AND INDUSTRIALIZATION IS INEVITABLE EITHER WAY SO HE SHOULD STOP HIS WHINING

Moron

PICK A SIDE FENCE SITTER

HE WOULDNT GO LEFT

>a man whose main concerns were the environment and the expansion of authentic human freedom and autonomy would support wannabe authoritarians whose main goal seems to be hotboxing the planet while gesticulating wildly about immigrants and what people do with their genitals
L O L keep supporting your favorite team like a good bugman

>IMAGINE BEING ON THE LEFTOID TEAM WHICH YOU DEFACTO ARE BY NOT BEING ON THE RIGHT TEAM
YIKES!