10,000 Ted Kaczynskis

At the intersection of Self-Radicalization, Vicarious Violence and Parasocial Relationships.

From 1978 to 1995, America lived in fear of an elusive terrorist known as the “Unabomber”. This unknown individual delivered explosives to various hubs of science, tech and industry via the US postal service killing 3 people and injuring 23 more. Despite over a decade of investigation, millions of dollars spent and being the most wanted criminal in the United States, the combined efforts of the police, FBI and ATF were unable to stop his campaign of violence. The Unabomber always seemed one step ahead- sending more and more complicated explosives and still eluding capture. Clearly, this person was as brilliant as they were blood thirsty. Ironically, the Unabomber would only be caught because of one fatal flaw—he was a pedant.  

The Unabomber—later revealed to be Theodore J Kaczynski —was only stopped because his identity was discovered by his own brother of all people. During the height of his reign of terror, Kaczynski blackmailed the press into publishing his manifesto-,“Industrial Society and its Future” in which he railed against technology, modernity and the loss of meaning in human life. In this manifesto, he used the phrase “have your cake and eat it” instead of the more common “have your cake and eat it, too” which after reading the manifesto Kaczynski’s brother remembered Ted being particularly pedantic about this turn of phrase. He then noticed that the manifestos' writing style was the same as his brothers- who had long since abandoned modern society to live in the woods- and tipped off the FBI. Ted was arrested, his reign of terror ended, and industrial society kept on advancing, unhindered. 

It’s been almost 30 years since Kaczynski was arrested. I was only a small child at the time, so I have no memory of the trial. I wasn’t even born when his bombings started. However, since his death last year, I started thinking about how I was introduced to Kaczynski - through an audiobook posted on YouTube of “Industrial Society and its Future” narrated by a text to speech app. There is an obvious irony to being introduced to a manifesto written by a famously anti-technology serial killer through social media, but that observation has been made countless times by the critics of those who idolize Kaczynski, so I will pass that over in favor of the more interesting point. Not only is there an online community of people who have read (or listened to, in my case) the manifesto, it is so commonplace in some online spaces that even the ubiquitous rebuttals are a cliché. 

So, why is the manifesto of a serial killer popular with so many people, especially young people? Why do so many people see Kaczynski (sometimes semi-ironically referred to as “Uncle Ted”) as some kind of visionary? Is it his uncannily accurate predictions about modern society and technology? Is it that a certain type of person is drawn to the cult of personality around serial killers? Is it an edgy, ironic affectation that is so common in young people in the internet age? Most likely all of the above, but more importantly I think it is because good ol’ Uncle Ted is the canary in the coal mine for modern American alienation. His predictions about modern society and technology were prophetic, but sadly so were his random and misguided acts of senseless violence in an ultimately futile rage against “the system.” 

We live in an age of mass information and technological advancement that would have seemed like science fiction even within our own living memory. And like many high-tech sci-fi worlds, ours is increasingly dystopian. GDP has never been higher, but most people live paycheck to paycheck while a tiny elite prosper. We are more connected than ever with social media, but tensions in the US political system have not been higher since the 1960s. I talk to many people in their 20’s and 30s who will tell me wistfully their dream is to some day drop out of society, get a house or farm somewhere off the grid and live with friends/family/fellow doomsday preppers or their lesbian polyamorous commune (this will vary depending on the 20-somethings personal politics). 

For a long time, this was a dream of mine, too. I work in the tech world and before I even cracked the cover of “Industrial Society and It’s Future” my half-formed plan was to work hard and save enough money that I can buy some land in the woods somewhere and get a cabin for myself, my partner and my dogs to live a simple life free of the stresses of modern life and technology. Only later did I find out this was exactly Kaczinski’s plan. He would become a professor at UC Berkeley and teach mathematics just long enough to save the money to buy a cabin in the woods and drop out of society to live off the grid. I found this parallel a bit disturbing, but I would be lying if I said that I didn’t find some excitement in it, too. After all, Kaczynski was a certified genius (167 IQ) and even with the killings, his manifesto was heralded by some as a work of unparalleled genius. If I came to the same conclusion about modern society that he did, surely, I’m some kind of misunderstood genius too? 

Of course, I am not a genius, and I don’t think I’m especially misunderstood. The fact that so many other people have had this revelation shows I am not even unique in this realization. But I think it does speak to something deeper, however. This brings me back to my earlier question. What about Ted Kaczynski is so powerful that he has inspired a following that has ironically spread through memes? Why has he been such a catalyst for the modern, terminally online young person?  

Before getting into that, it is worth noting that the acolytes of Kaczynski are mostly white, mostly male. Before you either roll your eyes in exasperation or nod your head in smug agreement, let’s unpack this a little further. There has been an epidemic of random, mass violence in America in the last 20 years or so. In the past, the mass violence was mostly done by young men. Much was made of this in political spaces online- either by the left bemoaning toxic masculinity, white supremacy, gun culture, etc. or by the right bemoaning how young men in modern society have lost their position, no longer have anything to work for and the things like a wife, stable job and a house are now out of his reach. Both sides have their points, but I think it is missing the bigger picture. Many young men suffer these afflictions, but very few commit acts of violence. But when they do, it is often done in a dramatic fashion and accompanied by a manifesto. However, we do live in an age of diversity and inclusion, and even mass killers are getting the DEI treatment.  

In 2023 in Nashville, Tennessee, there was another mass shooting. An armed assailant entered Covenant Elementary School and killed 6 people- —three of them children. What made this situation somewhat unique was that the shooter was a transgender man. As of January 2024, the shooters manifesto has not been made public, although (unconfirmed) leaks suggest the shooter was a proponent of far-left ideology and specifically targeted his former Christian school for this reason. One of the most insidious aspects of modern media culture is that whenever there is a mass killing, people online and on cable news will be in a mad dash to either use the shooters race, gender, or religion to fuel their own arguments against their ideological opponents. Depending on where the killer lands on the identity scale and what their manifesto says, you will often see people either sympathizing with the killers’ motives (while condemning the violence in the strongest possible terms, of course) or using it to push their narrative that the other side is evil, and their ideology leads to violence. And predictably, this happened with the Nashville shooter, too.  

To me, however, this is not the interesting part. Using tragedy to demonize your opponents is as old as violence itself. But why are people secretly (or openly, in some cases) cheering on this violence? I think that it is because in some ways, we see ourselves in these people. Just as I found myself understanding Kaczynski’s discontent with modern life and technology but would never go as far as violence, perhaps a transgender person who has potentially experienced a lifetime of hate and violence may sympathize just a little bit with the Nashville shooter on their worst day. After all, as the Joker says to Batman in the Alan Moore graphic novel “The Killing Joke,” there was very little that separated Batman from becoming a deranged killer like him. “All it takes is one bad day.” Lately, a lot of Americans have been having a lot of bad days.  

In some ways, this is nothing new. From edgy teens (or adults who should be old enough to know better) idolizing Hitler or Stalin to the strange fandom of women who fetishize serial killers, there is something about violence that draws some people in. Perhaps it’s because of some misguided adherence to an ideology like the Christchurch shooter. Perhaps it’s feelings of self-loathing that metastasized into hatred of the other like the case of the Pulse massacre. Perhaps it’s hero worship like in the case of two teenagers who in 2019 planned to reenact the Columbine shootings. Sometimes it is even as banal as isolation and loneliness turning to directionless violence like the Virgina Tech shooter. There is no denying, however, that some people are drawn to the vicarious release that comes with fetishizing these mass killers. 

Increasingly these days, political violence by deranged individuals is becoming the norm. From an assailant breaking into the home of Nancy Pelosi in an attempt to murder her to the individual who was caught by police a block away from the home of Brett Kavanaugh with multiple firearms, knives, explosives, and intent to assassinate him, Americans are increasingly taking their frustrations with the political system into their own hands. Similarly, perhaps more disturbingly, more and more Americans are agreeing with these violent individuals. If you followed the news and the discussions surrounding these events, you may have seen comments on the attempted assassination of Pelosi to the effect of “She had it coming anyway, she was a corrupt communist trying to destroy America!” You may have also seen that despite Kavanaugh being found innocent in the court of law, there were many who thought “the rapist deserved it! Besides, he was appointed by Trump, we don’t need people like him in power!” What’s more, many would see their deaths as a good thing merely because the person who may have been killed was on the opposite side of the political spectrum. With this in mind, one can’t help but dread the seeming inevitability of a major political assassination in the near future. Personally, however, I fear the fallout more and what it will mean for the political discourse and the types of people it will embolden. Both those who feel that the killing was justified and those who now feel vindicated in retaliatory acts of violence. If you look at history, once that cycle of violence begins there is no way out that does not end in mass bloodshed. 

This brings me back to Uncle Ted. He was a certified genius. He went to Harvard, the most prestigious school in the US, and went on to become a professor of mathematics at the University of California, Berkeley. He was an upper middle-class white male in the 1960s when that was if not a guarantee of success, it meant there would be no institutional opposition to anything he wanted to do. He had a bright future ahead of him by all accounts. So, why did he do it? There are conspiracies, of course, but one documented fact is that in his time at Harvard, he was subjected to cruel psychological experiments that would include having him present his world view and beliefs to one of the researchers. The “study” originally said the participants would then debate those views with an interviewer, but in reality, the researcher would viciously mock, belittle and tear apart what he presented in a matter that psychologist Henry Murray (in his own words) described as "vehement, sweeping, and personally abusive". They would also record the session and play it back to the participants multiple times. I am not going to try to make some melodramatic point about how being in modern society and living in the age of social media is like some MK-Ultra style psyop, but there is something to be said for how combative and ideologically antagonistic modern discourse—especially in the online space—has become. There is also something to be said for the type of person and discourse that environment creates and what it has done to American society. 

I have known and have talked to lots of different people about the future of the country- everyone from the proverbial blue-haired, woke activist with a gender identity indecipherable to anyone without a queer studies degree to the flag-waving MAGA-boomers who think the vaccine is how Bill Gates injects you with the 5G- and despite the many differences, there is one commonality. No matter who you are or what your beliefs are, no one seems to see a future in which things turn out well. In fact, it is one of the few things Americans seem to agree on these days- we are going down the wrong path and things are only getting worse.  

So, as the world gets more dangerous, prospects shrink, basic necessities become unaffordable luxury goods, family members and friends become ideological enemies and a world that once felt predictable seems like an endless stream of chaos, don't be surprised if we see more and more isolated instances of violence striking out in futile acts of frustration against this new world. Don’t be surprised if one of these people’s motives secretly ends up appealing to you, either. After all, we live in an age of targeted marketing and hyper-individualistic identity. Even if there hasn’t been one yet, there may be a boutique mass killer that shares your ideology coming to a crowded area, political rally or public figure near you very soon. Manifesto sold separately.