Ted Kaczynski would have been appalled that someone who thought we should “recycle some, or get an EV, or something” felt inspired by his writing. He really did think humanity should revert to primitive agriculturalism, and was an extremist who was not willing to compromise on this point.

Also, environmentalism is at most a distant secondary theme in the manifesto. The primary reasons he gives for being anti-industrialization have nothing to do with preserving the environment.

Recycling is still polluting a lot (from transports, energy, resources, emissions) and it's not handling that much material, and only a couple cycles between different plastics classes. EV also is also polluting on the same order of magnitude than fossil fuel cars. You can avoid plastic wrappings, and use more you legs (walk, bike) without going full primitive. That's really the problem, how did industry managed to make people think recycling and EV is ecology? The power of ads and communication, because it's not

"That's really the problem, how did industry managed to make people think recycling and EV is ecology? "

Because it can be ecology, if done right.

Garbage has to be moved anyway. So if you move all the cans (alluminium) to one place and resmelt it, than this is definitely less ressource intense, than mining new alluminium and shipping it.

> Garbage has to be moved anyway

It has to be reduced drastically first (buying local, avoiding plastic packaging, composting food wastes separately (what a shame to send that to an incinerator)

Aluminium cans (their paints however is toxic), or glass bottles is the best case, but most of the time it's plastic bottles (for water, which is nonsensical, people should use tap water, or soft drinks, or juices, both unhealthy products)

"composting food wastes separately (what a shame to send that to an incinerator)"

We in germany don't.

Otherwise sure. Reuse, reduce, recycle.

And I think it is ok, if in the process of transitioning from not caring and throwing all in the bin - towards sustainability, that there will be also lots of stupid things done in the name of ecology. (I have seen so much waste and inefficency, by people who think they do good) But it is all experimenting, on what works and what doesn't. Socially and economically. I am actually optimistic, that we get towards a sustainable society eventually, but I don't think, I will live that long.

Me too, I'm optimistic, things will self-balance naturally, in a more or less brutal way, I'm not afraid or anxious at all, living day by day.

For polluting less, what sure works is to buy less, possess less things

This is all true, but what does it have to do with my comment?

When you revert to pure agriculturalism, where does that happen exactly, it is in the environment. Fighting industry, is a return to nature, which happens to be, the environment. To imply that Kaczynski wasn't concerned with the environment is pretty large stretch, especially considering all the people that consider him an eco-fascist fighting for the environment.

To all the other replies about "this or that solution" is not really helping the environment. So what. Do something. Calling out how some things have failed as a seeming argument to give up and just pollute is a failure mind set. "Oh well, recycling didn't work as well as we thought, guess I'll just dump my hamburger wrapper in the ditch", is BS. Do people really not remember how polluted the highways used to be with trash, or rivers catching on fire from chemical dumping. We have made progress, and we should try to make more progress. Not be like "well EV's still create a lot of waste, guess I'll just go de-tune my Mustang and do some dragging this weekend". I can't believe how many people split hairs on some technology-X and use it as excuse to do nothing.

> When you revert to pure agriculturalism, where does that happen exactly, it is in the environment.

Everything happens “in the environment”, of course.

What I meant was that Ted Kaczynski’s main motivation for wanting to return to primitive agriculturalism was not a concern about industrialization damaging the environment. So he would not have cared about EVs or recycling as they are still happening in a technological society.

Your are correct. Guess it is more subtle reading. He was against industry, so many people would call him an environmentalist. But EV's are pretty bad example on my part, because of course they would require industry.