In times of escalating geopolitical tensions and increasing repression - even extending to satirical online anti-industrial activism, as seen in the recent arrest of nature_pilled- the small anti-tech scene risks falling into a familiar trap that has already weakened many movements before it: virtual radicalism and isolation.
Such performative radicalism is indeed typical of self-proclaimed revolutionary groups that rely heavily on theory while remaining disconnected from practice. This tendency can be identified through a number of recurring features that we have unfortunately already observed[1].
No presence on the ground: these radicals avoid real-world agitation, rendering any claim to building a revolutionary vanguard hollow. As aresult, they remain trapped in an online echo chamber, unable to spread their ideas beyond it. This condemns them to isolation and an ultimately inoffensive existence, sustained by the need to protect their online ethos and maintain an image of the arrogant and misunderstood rebel.
Kaczynski, quoting Mao’s theorical work, had already identified the defining characteristics of this kind of corrupted profile:
“arrogance, the airs of a self-styled hero, unwillingness to make progress, an unwillingness to share the joys and hardships of the masses, a concern for personal fame and gain.”
In the comfort of their online niche, they cultivate an image of online purity and theoretical authority, while avoiding the concrete conflicts that come with advancing uncompromising anti-tech positions. Although they claim to oppose leftism, they shy away from real-world confrontation, even as leftist currents continue to grow and promote counter-revolutionary aims. They denounce others as “over-socialized”, yet remain unwilling to risk public disapproval, revealing their own dependence on social validation and fear of reputational cost.
“The movement must win respect for its ideas, its vigor, its effectiveness. If it is widely feared and hated, so much the better; but it must earn for itself a reputation as the purest and most uncompromisingly revolutionary of all oppositional movements.” Anti-Tech Revolution, Theodore Kaczynski
Rather than confronting reformists IRL, they pick fights within the anti-tech niche, relying on the only tactic available to them: online communication. From there, they criticize those attempting to organize materially, accusing them of the same “virtue signaling” they are themselves deeply embedded in - simply because online posturing is how they exist, and because social media is structurally built around visibility, attention, and status competition.
To that we need to keep in mind that real organizational work only begins outside the screen: among real people gathered in physical groups, within a structured organization, through human relationships, and ultimately leading to concrete action.
Unfortunately, their refusal to move from theory to practice prevents them from developing even the basic skills required of any serious revolutionary today. Cut off from real-world learning, afraid of being seen as leftist for actually organizing, they therefore have no real-world impact. Instead, they fantasize about a future “revolutionary moment” in which they would emerge from the shadows to act -though it remains unclear to what end, since they are only known within a small, insulated online niche.
“17. Revolutionaries will not suddenly become effective agitators, propagandists, organizers and leaders at the moment when the system reaches a crisis. They will need to begin developing these abilities through practical experience long before the crisis arrives.” Anti-Tech Revolution, Theodore Kaczynski
Their instinct for self-preservation leads them to invoke “security” or “strategy” in abstract terms to justify inaction, masking their lack of concrete collective existence behind such rhetoric. They seem to be confusing the public work of legitimate aboveground movements -which has historically involved visible leadership, the propagation of ideas through legal actions, and exposure to repression even when sticking to legal frameworks- with a posture resembling underground groups, without assuming the corresponding risks.
Once again, this is a comfortable position: it allows them to appear radical online while taking no real risks or making any sacrifice to translate ideas into material reality and exert influence in the world.
Theodore Kaczynski warned against the dangers of a lack of flexibility and a wait-and-see attitude: becoming disconnected from reality, falling into isolation, and losing efficiency. In contrast, a proactive capacity to act and adapt within this evolving context, and to seize the opportunities it presents, would enable revolutionaries to progressively advance toward their intermediate aims and, ultimately, their final objective.
“Major opportunities, however, may be a long time incoming. This doesn't mean that the movement can afford to relax and take it easy. On the contrary, while it is waiting the movement must remain hard at work, not only to build its strength so that it will be able to take full advantage of opportunities when they arrive, but also because an inactive movement will die or shrink to an apathetic rump.” Anti-Tech Revolution, Theodore Kaczynski
For all these reasons, we warn against this current trend in the anti-tech sphere: virtual communication should in no case constitute the entirety of a revolutionary movement’s existence. In ATR, our online communication campaigns represent only a tenth of our actual work. Alongside our recent campaign #freenaturepilled, we were also writing a manifesto, blocking an opening ceremony of the mayor of Paris, organizing public trainings, and following a social movement in another country.
In fact, any serious anti-tech group must analyze the context in which it operates in order to navigate a delicate balance that allows it to gain strength over time both online and offline action. To multiply their strength, these groups would benefit from uniting their actions against a common adversary: technology.
Thats is exactly why we do not see this tendency as inevitable.
We believe that the first step in countering online isolation and vitualradicalism is to rebuild safe channels of dialogue between organizations, and even to organize in-person meetings between anti-tech groups, so that disagreements over posture do not end up dividing us. Thus ATR is prepared to allocate funds to facilitate meetings with anti-tech revolutionaries from around the world, and to host in France or Belgium any individuals or groups who would like to meet us in person.
No revolutionary theory without revolutionary practice.
No anti-tech revolution without unified action.
Land and Freedom. Anti-Tech Revolution.
