\documentclass[DIV=12,%
               BCOR=0mm,%
               headinclude=false,%
               footinclude=false,open=any,%
               fontsize=11pt,%
               oneside,%
               paper=210mm:11in]%
               {scrbook}






\usepackage[noautomatic]{imakeidx}



\usepackage{microtype}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{alltt}
\usepackage{verbatim}
\usepackage[shortlabels]{enumitem}
\usepackage{tabularx}
\usepackage[normalem]{ulem}
\def\hsout{\bgroup \ULdepth=-.55ex \ULset}
% https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/22410/strikethrough-in-section-title
% Unclear if \protect \hsout is needed. Doesn't looks so
\DeclareRobustCommand{\sout}[1]{\texorpdfstring{\hsout{#1}}{#1}}
\usepackage{wrapfig}

% avoid breakage on multiple <br><br> and avoid the next [] to be eaten
\newcommand*{\forcelinebreak}{\strut\\*{}}

\newcommand*{\hairline}{%
  \bigskip%
  \noindent \hrulefill%
  \bigskip%
}

% reverse indentation for biblio and play

\newenvironment*{amusebiblio}{
  \leftskip=\parindent
  \parindent=-\parindent
  \smallskip
  \indent
}{\smallskip}

\newenvironment*{amuseplay}{
  \leftskip=\parindent
  \parindent=-\parindent
  \smallskip
  \indent
}{\smallskip}

\newcommand*{\Slash}{\slash\hspace{0pt}}


% http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/3033/forcing-linebreaks-in-url
\PassOptionsToPackage{hyphens}{url}\usepackage[hyperfootnotes=false,hidelinks,breaklinks=true]{hyperref}
\usepackage{bookmark}

\usepackage[english,shorthands=off]{babel}
\babelfont{rm}[Path=/usr/share/fonts/truetype/cmu/,%
 BoldFont=cmunbx.ttf,%
 BoldItalicFont=cmunbi.ttf,%
 ItalicFont=cmunti.ttf]{cmunrm.ttf}
\babelfont{tt}[Scale=MatchLowercase,%
 Path=/usr/share/fonts/truetype/cmu/,%
 BoldFont=cmuntb.ttf,%
 BoldItalicFont=cmuntx.ttf,%
 ItalicFont=cmunit.ttf]{cmuntt.ttf}
\babelfont{sf}[Scale=MatchLowercase,%
 Path=/usr/share/fonts/truetype/cmu/,%
 BoldFont=cmunsx.ttf,%
 BoldItalicFont=cmunso.ttf,%
 ItalicFont=cmunsi.ttf]{cmunss.ttf}



\renewcommand*{\partpagestyle}{empty}


% global style

\pagestyle{plain}




\usepackage{indentfirst}

% remove the numbering
\setcounter{secnumdepth}{-2}

% remove labels from the captions
\renewcommand*{\captionformat}{}
\renewcommand*{\figureformat}{}
\renewcommand*{\tableformat}{}
\KOMAoption{captions}{belowfigure,nooneline}
\addtokomafont{caption}{\centering}







\deffootnote[3em]{0em}{4em}{\textsuperscript{\thefootnotemark}~}


\addtokomafont{disposition}{\rmfamily}
\addtokomafont{descriptionlabel}{\rmfamily}


\frenchspacing
% avoid vertical glue
\raggedbottom

% this will generate overfull boxes, so we need to set a tolerance
% \pretolerance=1000
% pretolerance is what is accepted for a paragraph without
% hyphenation, so it makes sense to be strict here and let the user
% accept tweak the tolerance instead.
\tolerance=200
% Additional tolerance for bad paragraphs only
\setlength{\emergencystretch}{30pt}

% (try to) forbid widows/orphans
\clubpenalty=10000
\widowpenalty=10000





% given that we said footinclude=false, this should be safe
\setlength{\footskip}{2\baselineskip}
\setlength{\parindent}{15pt}

\title{Is the Unabomber an Anarchist?}
\date{1995}
\author{Wayne Price}
\subtitle{}






% https://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.text.tex/6fYmcVMbSbQ/discussion
\hypersetup{%
pdfencoding=auto,
pdftitle={Is the Unabomber an Anarchist?},%
pdfauthor={Wayne Price},%
pdfsubject={},%
pdfkeywords={anti-tech vanguardism; anarchism; analysis of Ted's ideas \& actions}%
}


\begin{document}









  \begin{titlepage}


  \strut\vskip 2em
  \begin{center}

  {\usekomafont{title}{\huge Is the Unabomber an Anarchist?\par}}%
  \vskip 1em
  
  \vskip 2em
  
  {\usekomafont{author}{Wayne Price\par}}%
  
  \vskip 1.5em



   
   \vfill



  
  {\usekomafont{date}{1995\par}}%
  


  \end{center}


     \end{titlepage}
     
     \cleardoublepage





\tableofcontents
% start a new right-handed page

\cleardoublepage




The “Unabomber” claims to be an anarchist.
For 17 years, the person who has
been called the Unabomber has been
attacking people with bombs, without making an explanation. The bomb targets have
included some rich and powerful individuals, such as the April killing of a lobbyist
for a logging association. But the main targets have been college professors (of genetics and computer science) and owners of
computer stores. “Unintended” injuries have
happened to others, including students, a
secretary, and passengers on an airplane. In
six bombings, there have been three deaths
and 22 injuries.


Now he has written a letter declaring his
politics to be “anarchist and radical environmentalist.” (Although the Unabomber
claims to be “the terrorist group FC,” I use
“he,” since the evidence suggests one person and the politics suggests a male.) The
Oklahoma bombing by a few fascists is
widely seen as reflecting the political culture of a broader far-right movement. The
question is sure to be raised: Should the
bombings by this “anarchist” similarly be
seen as reflecting the politics of the anarchist and radical environmental movements? My answer: No, and Maybe.


To be sure, the Unabomber (or “FC”) was
bombing for years before raising the anarchist banner. However, his aim was anti-technological from the first. Whether or not
they originally inspired him, there is no
reason to doubt that he has come to agree
with anarchist ecological views. His opinions are close enough to certain widespread
views within the anti-authoritarian movement to be worth discussing.

\section{His Anarchist Vision}


His letter to the \emph{New York Times} (4\Slash{}26\Slash{}95)
states, “We call ourselves anarchist because
we would like, ideally, to break down all
society into very small, completely
autonomous units.” It is true that anarchists
have generally been decentralists, because
participatory democracy is only possible in
human-scale communities where people can
meet face-to-face. This may include villages,
factory councils, city neighborhoods, social
clubs, or whatever. However, many anarchists have also advocated for a federation
from the bottom-up, so that local groups are
in a network of voluntary associations covering regions, continents, and the world.


His vision includes complete destruction
of the “industrial-technological system”
worldwide. Again, most anarchists today do
not regard the current development of
industrial technology as “progressive” or
even “neutral,” as do Marxists and liberals.
Capitalism and the state have developed
this technology for their own purposes of
exploitation, profit and war. A new society
will not be able to simply use these
machines just as they are.


However there is a dispute within the
anti-authoritarian\Slash{}ecological movement.
Some believe that a new society should use
technological knowledge to create a new
type of industry, bountiful but non-exploitative and ecological. Others advocate going
back to pre-industrial society, to medieval
technology, or hunting and gathering.


Like the Unabomber, these people seem
to forget that pre-industrial society was
often highly oppressive, including monarchist, mass slavery, feudalism, war, and
the oppression of women before class society even developed. In any case, pre-industrial society evolved into industrial society;
out of that came this. Just as industrial
machinery is not automatically liberatory,
neither is the absence of industrial technology automatically liberatory.

\section{His Strategy}


The Unabomber admits to having no strategy
for anarchism. “We don’t see any clear road
to this goal, so we leave it for the indefinite
future.” Instead, “our more immediate goal,
which we think may be attainable during the
next several decades, is the destruction of the
worldwide industrial system.”


There are many other anarchists who
have no idea how anarchism might come.
And neither I nor anyone else has a crystal
ball or a fully worked-out analysis. But it is
possible to begin to work toward a modern
analysis and strategy for an anarchist revolution. This requires developing both our
theory and our activity. We need to analyze
the social system (using tools from various
sources such as feminism, classical
Marxism, historical anarchism, ecological
theory, etc.). We need to look for the weaknesses in the system, the nature of the
developing crisis, the social forces likely to
struggle. Especially, we need to participate
in the popular struggles, in dialogue with
other viewpoints. We need to develop an
organization that can help us do these
things without tying us down.
Instead, the Unabomber proposes to blow
up individuals. In a letter to one of his victims, he wrote, “If there were no computer
scientists, there would be no progress in
computer science.” Clearly he thinks of the
enemy as individuals rather than a social
system — a social system that can create
computer scientists faster than he can kill
them. Similarly he blames the technology,
not the society which requires it.
He also hopes to “propagate anti-industrial ideas” by his bombing. But bombs (or
assassination or kidnapping), when not a
close part of a popular struggle, are seen by
most people as one more evil of the social
system, not as part of the solution. If anything, it leads people to support the establishment against those who seem to want
pointless destruction.
He is trying to spread ideas by a book. If
it is published and publicized by the media,
he promises to stop bombing people, and
only target buildings in the future. As if the
rulers care about the deaths of professors or
computer-store owners!

\section{Violence}


Like most people, I am not a pacifist. The
existence of widespread police brutality and
the growth of the fascist “militias” show
that popular movements will have to
defend themselves. The state will never
allow a non-violent, democratic revolution.


However, the use of violence exacts a
price. It makes revolutionaries less sensitive, less morally keen, less like people of
the new world. Violence is only justifiable
in a revolutionary situation or in defense of
a popular struggle (for example, the Black
Panther Party at its height). When revolutionaries, isolated from most people, set out
to strike at even the most vicious oppressors, the results are invariably bad.
Bystanders get injured, the revolutionaries
become more isolated from the people, they
get killed or jailed, and the state gets a popular excuse for greater repression.


As a general rule, I would give political
and legal support to such revolutionaries
when arrested by the state, despite my disagreements. In the case of the Unabomber,
he is a murderer dragging noble ideas
through the mud.

\section{His Authoritarianism}


Anarchism has a popular image of bomb-throwing, based on a real trend in anarchist
history. But there are other historical trends
in anarchism, including organizing mass
labor struggles (anarcho-syndicalist, the
IWW), mass military forces (Makhno,
Durruti), and even a pacifist trend (Tolstoy,
Goodman). There is nothing inevitably “terrorist” about anarchism.


In our time most, “terrorism” has been
carried out by Marxist-Leninists, nationalists, and other statists, not anarchists. (Of
course, such violence has always been small
potatoes compared to the massive terror
used by the military and police forces of the
states.) For example, the Weatherpeople of
the ‘60s were admirers of Stalin and Charles
Manson.


This sort of small group “terrorism” is
inevitably authoritarian. The Unabomber,
who admits to having no strategy for popular struggle, seeks to overthrow industrial
society virtually single-handedly. He will
force people to live in non-industrial, totally decentralized society? What if they do
not want to live in such a society? And
they do not; the vast majority support the
existing system, more or less. Rather than
trying to persuade them, he intends to blow
up their society.


Anarchists are against the vanguardism
of the Leninists but they are often unclear
about just what vanguardism is. Many
think that they avoid vanguardism by being
against the self-organization of anarchists.
In my opinion, vanguardism is not the
belief that a small group may be right and
the majority wrong. Few believe in revolutionary anarchism while the vast majority
supports statist capitalism; we have every
right to organize ourselves to try to persuade the majority of our viewpoint, always
acknowledging that we have much to learn
from others.


No, vanguardism is the belief that the
correct minority has the right to impose its
views on the majority. When the minority
seeks to rule over the people, to act for
them, to be political in their place, then it is
vanguardist and authoritarian, no matter
how “anti-authoritarian” is its ideology — as
is the case of the Unabomber.

\section{The Unabomber and Anarchism}


To return to the original question: are the
Unabomber’s murders connected to the politics of anarchism? First, I answer “No.” His
views have nothing in common with my
views on anarchism. And even the most
misguided anarchist bomb-throwers and
assassins of the past would not have killed
professors and students.


But I also say “Maybe.” His views are
similar to those of many anarchists: the
lack of interest in developing a strategy for
popular revolution; the belief that the
enemy is industrial technology; not building an organization; not participating in
popular struggles, but acting as an elite
above the people; the worship of violence,
abstracted from popular struggle; a willingness to impose their views on the people,
even while denouncing as vanguardist
those who try to persuade people. Perhaps I
could add: an ambiguity about democracy,
seeing anarchism as for freedom versus
democracy, rather than as the most extreme
form of democracy. All these concepts are
reflected in the Unabomber’s letters and
actions and are also held by various trends
within the anti-authoritarian movements.
No doubt the Unabomber will be used
as an excuse for denouncing anarchism.
The movement would be wise to prepare
by having open discussion about him and
his methods.









% begin final page

\clearpage



% new page for the colophon

\thispagestyle{empty}

\begin{center}

The Ted K Archive





\strut

\end{center}

\strut

\vfill

\begin{center}


Wayne Price

Is the Unabomber an Anarchist?



1995


\bigskip


1995 Aug\Slash{}Sep issue of Love \& Rage. <\href{https://archive.org/details/love\_and\_rage\_6.4/page/n1/mode/1up?view=theater}{archive.org\Slash{}details\Slash{}love\_and\_rage\_6.4\Slash{}page\Slash{}n1}>
   

       

       

       

       

       

       

   



\bigskip
\textbf{www.thetedkarchive.com}


\end{center}

% end final page with colophon


% end closing pages



\end{document}


% No format ID passed.



