Why is it always losers who want to make radical changes to society...

Why is it always losers who want to make radical changes to society? Are they just projecting their own dissatisfaction onto society?

Attached: tedk.jpg (350x350, 96K)

Other urls found in this thread:

quora.com/Was-Ted-Kaczynski-a-good-mathematician-How-good
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Yes, but that does not necessarily make them wrong. Have you ever considered that people who don't want to change a society are the ones who benefit from it the most?

Wasn´t Teddy top tier mathematician?

>Kaczynski had returned to Illinois for the May 1978 bombing, and stayed there for a time to work with his father and brother at a foam rubber factory. However, in August 1978 he was fired by his brother for writing insulting limericks about a female supervisor whom he had briefly courted.[51][52] The female supervisor later recalled Kaczynski as "intelligent, quiet," but remembered little of their acquaintance and firmly denied they had had any romantic relationship.

There is no reason to change a system you're winning. Only the mentally ill seek to destroy what benefits them, but that's why we have the Left.

dunno what this has to do with anything, he was indeed a harvard mathematician. he was also literally the victim of the MKULTRA experiments (which is why conspiratards love him so much) and it has been argued that this abuse is to blame for him flipping the fuck out and bombing people

This.

Even if he's a Langley creation, he's still the best political lit to come out of USA in a century. He just wanted people to read his letters.

Why would someone who is content with society ever want to change it? It sounds like you answered your own question.

Man I want to read these limericks, I love limericks.

>Why is it always losers who want to make radical changes to society?
If you believe with all your heart that a system is either there for your benefit or is unchangeable then you'll just accept life the way it is. But if you're a man like Ted you see it's neither there for your benefit or unchangeable. You can only see these things from the outside looking in, only the people for whom the systems spell doesn't work can point out its true nature.

They're not losers, they're anomalies. Certain circumstances arranged in a certain order that a man was born with the intelligence to reason the folly of society and the life experiences to give him the perspective to see it. Anyone who ever went against society was on the fringes of it. You're one of the drones, so you don't understand. I understand.

Spotted the loser.

Person who is not a radical: Attractive, has a well paying job, spends their excess leisure sipping drinks imported from around the world and idly wonders at the mystery of it all. Why must people suffer? DUDE, like, it's all so sublime.

Person who is a radical: Ugly, poor, the generic "people who have it bad that I must help as part of my moral identity" the successful guy was thinking about while he sipped. Does not have any expensive drinks and is now burning down your fucking front yard because your faggotry is fueled the meat grinder of his existence.

Non-radical guy: "WTF it's not fair that you're resentful and acting this way?!"

>jealousy excuses abhorrent behaviour

Seems reasonable

The point being that pointing out radicals are losers in this society is irrelevant, of course they often will be, but again that does not make them wrong, that makes them weak. The weak need not be inherently ideologically incoherent though.

So there's really no reason for you to point this out, other than to just be a sociopathic nigger. I guess the next time an incel decides to send an engine block through the brain cases of a crowd of high school students, and one of them turns out to be your sister, you might pause a moment to think about whether or not this is a Perfectly Just World™. Not because the incel deserves any lenience, but because this happened in the first place.

There once was a disaster from Western industrialization that sucked all the jizz of the nation. The leftists were tired, the ghetto African Americans were hired. Why did we give away the power process on plantations?

There once was a lady love supervisor. Who thought none could be all the wiser. But I knew her proclivities and surrogate activities. She tried me, but I'd rather be fired.

Attached: 1559502936403.jpg (3000x2000, 1.96M)

you owe your success to the losers who changed society into something you can succeed at before you were born

Cry loser when you get shot to death

>a wild edgelord has appeared

The child who is not embraced by the village will burn it down to feel its warmth.

>embraced by the village
Kind of sounds like a euphemism for a paedophile ring, in which case it’s surely the other way about.

There's a game-theoretic explanation to this. The competition at the bottom is far more intense than at the top, so much so that you have more incentive to try and quit the game rather than keep playing it. When you're winning or doing moderately well - there's no reason to concern yourself with trying to figure things out. However, if it doesn't come naturally - that's when you start to develop a higher-level awareness.

They have less to lose.

That projecting. I’m something of a loser myself and I’m no fan of capitalist society but I have no plans to fucking ram a car into a crowd because I can’t get laid/I don’t earn enough/people think I am weird.

Because they have broken free of their Stockholm Syndrome and want to free other captives?

did he have to be?

are you projecting your own satisfaction onto society

You missed the point of the post, shitposter-san. If you can't even parse a half-baked response to your obvious and terrible trolling, perhaps you should hang up the horns for now and go read an actual book. I promise it's a better use of your time. At the moment I am looking for a good non-fiction book on Kowloon Walled City if anybody can shoot me a rec.

>good non-fiction book on Kowloon Walled City
Make a post. I want to read about it too. I don't even mind if its fiction, that place was cool.

It's not that complicated. Being the status quo means you have reached the pinnacle of contentment. There are no more social hurdles, no more status gates, to be passed.
Those who are unable or unwilling to participate in the rat race therefore want to overthrow it.
Why do you never see the rich and famous riot on the streets?

cringe

Retard-tier post and completely ahistorical. Engels came from a wealthy industrialist family, Lenin was comfortably middle class with access to higher education and many career choices, Kroptokin was a literally prince for fucks sake. It's called giving a fuck about the world around you and the people who inhabit it.

>they just projecting their own dissatisfaction onto society
Well its just a fact that if your satisfied that you wont see the need to change anything. You can be materially satisfied yet still intellectually or emotionally etc discontent.

Selective counterexamples there. Marx was a loser, Stalin was a loser and a scumbag criminal to the point where Trotsky wrote to a friend that it's depressing to be around him. Not to mention that it wasn't exactly the cream of the crop that made up the majority of participants in every revolution. It was filthy, ignorant, disgusting peasants - which is to be expected.

His brother was always a real asshole

Why didn't a major publication just publish his manifesto?

>pokemon reference

go home mutt

Kaczynski was a loser more out of choice, he could have been a successful academic had he chosen to do it. Though he was a failure on a social level, something that probably did affect his outlook and how he ended up (though this doesn't in itself disprove or even lessen his ideas).

Attached: limerick.jpg (640x336, 41K)

Napoleon and Stalin would like to have a word.

Its okay when the military does it.
Only they have the means to enact that kind of change.

He became professor at UC Berkeley at 25 so yes see link if you want more info

quora.com/Was-Ted-Kaczynski-a-good-mathematician-How-good

Why was Teddy's brother such a traitor?

Being a moralizer is retarded. Who cares if the behavior is "excused" or not? In reality you're also just a loser of another kind and you making this thread is an act of resentment because the slave in you resents that a "loser" with a gun or a bomb could potentially take your life away in a heartbeat. Everything you said about losers on a social level also applies to you on a metaphysical one, but your very resentment out of necessity blinds you from seeing it so that you won't engage with this post with anything greater than a glib comment. It's all so tiresome.

Based and nietzsche pilled

Limericks not as bawdy.