re: #398 jarheadlifer

The only Right Wing Luddites that immediately come to mind are the Amish - and I’m not really sure they could be labeled as right wing - they’re clearly pacifists, hardly a right-wing position.

I have to say that your description still smacks of classic American leftism, too me. I’ve never heard Pat Robertson nor Pat Buchannan rail against computers - the internet perhaps, but never computers. Much of Kaczynski’s craziness stemmed from a hyper-ecological position which is about as far removed from the American right wing as you can get.

Wrong. Hitler was an ecologically conscious vegetarian.

There is no need for the right to be knee-jerk anti-environmentalist, any more than there is a need for them to be knee-jerk pro-science or pro-technology (see the creationist socons on this issue). Good conservatives conserve what is worth conserving, and change, hopefully for the better, what is not (see Edmund Burke). Beneficial technological advances are, in my opinion, worth conserving, including computers and the internet. But Ted Kaczynski did not view those particular technological advances as beneficial. He wanted to change all that - back to an era before they existed - and freeze us there. He was clearly a Luddite reactionary (right wing), as opposed to progressives (left wing), who embrace ALL change, even deleterious change (see Obama) for change’s sake. Not all progress is good (I don’t wanna see Clone Wars on earth) and not all reaction against it is bad. But what we are doing now debating these issues IS good, and those who would prevent us from ever doing it are, IMHO, not so good.