Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

So, recently I have been forcing my self to read various things in the general categories dealing with race. I thought Ted Kazinskys manifesto might be interesting so I downloaded the audiobook version online.

Verdict: Mostly bullshit written by an individual that has high IQ in abstract symbolic thinking with an obsessive compulsive disorder that doesn't allow him to understand the world outside of the abstract symbolic psychological cage that he has built for him self.

Ted clearly has ABSOLUTELY ZERO experience in life, zero experience in organizing groups of humans, zero experience in running organizations and zero understanding of human and animal psychology. I have met people like this. They are usually mathematicians or programmers, are hugely productive in their specializations and can concentrate for long periods of time. But, they have no capacity to think outside of their rigidly defined framework of how they believe the universe works. You can't ever get them to concede that they could be wrong.

What he does get right, and correctly predicts as a problem that we will have to deal with in the future (from the perspective of the time when the manifesto was written) is leftism. Although his description of the psychological profiles of leftists are a little too high level, I think he might have provided a reasonable way categorize and think about what is a leftist, how their mind works and what drives them.

What he really gets wrong is the whole thrust of the manifesto: technology has destroyed everything and is the cause of all misery. This is where his obsessive compulsive disorder really shows up. He spends all of his time trying to make the case that technology has destroyed everything and that in order to be saved we must return to ... something nature something. Basically a ludicrously childish set of insights, incomprehensibly retarded analysis and a conclusion that is so vague there is no conclusion beyond we must return to nature.

I know he was experimented on by the government when he was young, but, this guy was broken at birth. In ancient times he would have been killed because he would not be able to provide for the tribe, today these types are useful in expanding fields of specialty that require a lifetime of dedication to move forward.

Overall:

1) Reasonable points made in the first 30 minutes or so.

2) The whole middle is nonsense by someone that has no clue about anything at all.

3) In the last hour or so he doubles back a bit and makes a few reasonable points.

4) The last part is absolute garbage.

VERDICT: The description of leftists might be useful because it summarizes their psychological profile better than most people that I have seen online. Other than that, the manifesto is useless nonsense.

FINAL THOUGHTS: I am forcing my self to read through a bunch of the stuff people link to or keep on bringing up like this manifesto. So far, honestly, most of it is utter garbage. For sure, all of it has some minimal value in either gathering up historical facts that have been deliberately ignored or obfuscated or perhaps even offer a marginal set of insights that MIGHT be considered useful. Overall, virtually nothing that I have read provides any useful information.

Next I will try to get therough the New Zeland manifesto. I agree with those that say that there is something odd about the massacre. I watched it, it did NOT look like people died, especially when he enters that one room with all the bodies in the corner and he fires a couple of shots at them and walks out. I have no proof (seen a few critiques online) but it doesn't read right. Let's see what this manifesto is all about.

So, recently I have been forcing my self to read various things in the general categories dealing with race. I thought Ted Kazinskys manifesto might be interesting so I downloaded the audiobook version online. Verdict: Mostly bullshit written by an individual that has high IQ in abstract symbolic thinking with an obsessive compulsive disorder that doesn't allow him to understand the world outside of the abstract symbolic psychological cage that he has built for him self. Ted clearly has ABSOLUTELY ZERO experience in life, zero experience in organizing groups of humans, zero experience in running organizations and zero understanding of human and animal psychology. I have met people like this. They are usually mathematicians or programmers, are hugely productive in their specializations and can concentrate for long periods of time. But, they have no capacity to think outside of their rigidly defined framework of how they believe the universe works. You can't ever get them to concede that they could be wrong. What he does get right, and correctly predicts as a problem that we will have to deal with in the future (from the perspective of the time when the manifesto was written) is leftism. Although his description of the psychological profiles of leftists are a little too high level, I think he might have provided a reasonable way categorize and think about what is a leftist, how their mind works and what drives them. What he really gets wrong is the whole thrust of the manifesto: technology has destroyed everything and is the cause of all misery. This is where his obsessive compulsive disorder really shows up. He spends all of his time trying to make the case that technology has destroyed everything and that in order to be saved we must return to ... something nature something. Basically a ludicrously childish set of insights, incomprehensibly retarded analysis and a conclusion that is so vague there is no conclusion beyond we must return to nature. I know he was experimented on by the government when he was young, but, this guy was broken at birth. In ancient times he would have been killed because he would not be able to provide for the tribe, today these types are useful in expanding fields of specialty that require a lifetime of dedication to move forward. Overall: 1) Reasonable points made in the first 30 minutes or so. 2) The whole middle is nonsense by someone that has no clue about anything at all. 3) In the last hour or so he doubles back a bit and makes a few reasonable points. 4) The last part is absolute garbage. VERDICT: The description of leftists might be useful because it summarizes their psychological profile better than most people that I have seen online. Other than that, the manifesto is useless nonsense. FINAL THOUGHTS: I am forcing my self to read through a bunch of the stuff people link to or keep on bringing up like this manifesto. So far, honestly, most of it is utter garbage. For sure, all of it has some minimal value in either gathering up historical facts that have been deliberately ignored or obfuscated or perhaps even offer a marginal set of insights that MIGHT be considered useful. Overall, virtually nothing that I have read provides any useful information. Next I will try to get therough the New Zeland manifesto. I agree with those that say that there is something odd about the massacre. I watched it, it did NOT look like people died, especially when he enters that one room with all the bodies in the corner and he fires a couple of shots at them and walks out. I have no proof (seen a few critiques online) but it doesn't read right. Let's see what this manifesto is all about.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (53).
[–] • 0 pt

Was he a jew? A quick google doesn't reveal it. But, holy shit, that would fit perfectly

I have a theory that Jews went through a lengthy inbreeding chokepoint that basically gives all of them at minimum a low level functional autism. This basically makes them look at the world in a very cold and mechanical way. They don't make connections to other people very well, instead they get absorbed by neurotic (as you put it very well) kind of obsessive examination of infinitely useless detail.

Which is basically what Teds manifesto is. It is a cold look at the world and the only tools he has available to him is a stunted toolset. He can only describe the world in abstract symbolic fashion, they way you would examine a math problem or a physics problem.

People wonder why Jews look at goyim as cattle. My experience jews is that this autism built into their species not only separates them from being able to see them selves as part of humanity, you can literally read in Teds manifesto him edging towards self deification: Ted believes he knows how the world works, no one can even suggest that he could be wrong, he has the answer that the world should listen to.

Look at any jew. You call it neuroticism, I call it autism. Either way, they are genetic dead end.

If Ted is a Jew, holy crap, it would fit amazing well.

[–] • 0 pt

It's the same with James Holmes and his writings explaining "moral relativity". More autistic bs trying to apply math to psychology.

[–] • 0 pt

Oh absolutely. I have also noticed in dealing with Jews is that they have this absolutely weird sense of self assurance ... a kind of confidence that is not backed up by anything at all.

This is especially prominent in Jews that emigrate from Israel in my experience.

It's a kind of hubris you would bring to a poker game that gives you an edge in that kind of abstract game.

I think their autism either amplifies their self confidence because they have no capacity of thinking beyond their stunted toolset or perhaps the autism stunts the part of the brain that handles empathy and social relationship and throws out of whack their sense of self worth.

[–] • 0 pt

I don't think he was a jew, just polish. Usually if I can't get a last name hit I'll look up other famous people with the same last name...no jews. His brother became a buddhist heh. Probably felt guilty.