In Ted’s Revolution And Why It Will Fail I noted that no one has yet to explain all of the ideologies in regards to the anti-tech movement and what they believe. I put forth that someone should try and explain this. For now, I will put forth 3 groups to better explain the type of people who are sympathetic to Ted and his views. These groups can overlap with each other, as shown.
Sympathisers comprise of those who are sympathetic to Ted, but do not agree with his solution. This is where most people sit in regards to Ted. They agree with some parts of his work and find it thought provoking, however his solution is seen by many as flawed, unrealistic or too extreme, summing up their opinion as “I agree with his diagnosis but disagree with his solution”. They believe it is better to advance new technology to reduce the harmful effects or work to use technology in a way which does not hamper freedom. They see Ted’s solution as no solution as all, and question many of the side effects of such an event.
Overlap between Sympathisers and Followers (example: encouraging self sufficiency to cause reform)
Followers are those who believe in Ted’s ideology in that the system must be destroyed, however oppose violence and believe that revolution is not possible. They instead try and gain an anti-tech following and encourage people to be more self sufficient and to use less technology. Either they believe that if enough people follow the movement that the system collapses or believe that collapse of the system will happen and so they are preparing for such an event.
Overlap between Followers and Radicals (believe in revolution but only a peaceful one or to only attack when the system is under severe stress)
Radicals are the most dangerous. They believe fully in Teds revolution and attempt to gather to discuss plans for such action. They believe in violence and destruction of infrastructure in order to destroy the system. Followers tend to object to Radicals, /tkg/ for example ignored these kinds of people, considering them either as “edgy kids who don’t know that words have consequences” or “glowies”.
Of course these groups are broad generalisations, however it makes it far easier to describe types of people in the anti-tech movement. I don’t expect people to start calling others by these labels, nor do I really want them to, but for those lurking such as me, its nice to have.