Scan barcode
wbt_1995's review
informative
medium-paced
5.0
Logical, lucid, and direct: these are the beginning words of the synopsis for Technological Slavery: Enhanced Edition, Volume 1 by Dr. Theodore Kaczynski. These words are indeed quite an apt description of this volume of writings. Contained within are various letters, essays, writings, and expansive notes elucidating Kacznyki’s arguments thoroughly and clearly, including the ground-breaking manifesto, Industrial Society and Its Future.
The “Enhanced” aspect of this volume is not simply a fresh coat of paint, along with the expansive and informative notes, Technological Slavery contains large amounts of sources and citations at the end of every section. Furthermore, the manifesto alone has received many improvements and quality upgrades. From grammar corrections to changes in italicization, to restoring whole sentences and words which in the past, sloppy editions were published by online copiers and indolent editors.
Along with the seminal manifesto, Industrial Society and Its Future, Technological Slavery contains many other writings and letters to various correspondents that expound Kaczyski’s many thought-provoking and revolutionary ideas. In the section titled “Letters to Dr. David Skrbina,” Kaczynski addresses and counters, clearly and logically, many dissenting arguments to the anti-tech worldview in his correspondence with Dr. David Skrbina, a former philosophy professor at the University of Michigan. Furthermore, in other letters to various other correspondents, Kaczynski explains and elaborates on his severely critical stance on technology, the industrial-technological system, and the urgent need for a revolutionary movement to force its downfall. Not only does he elucidate the nature of the technological system as one that is inexorably interconnected in all subsystems to constitute a unified, monolithic whole, but he also explains history within the context of general trends subject to “objective forces'' like geography and biology.
Additionally, another piece included within Technological Slavery is Kaczysnki’s meticulous explanation of how so-called “activists” actually aid the technological system in its quest to impose radical social changes: This is "The System’s Neatest Trick." He explains that valuable revolutionary force and fervor from would-be revolutionaries is diverted away from serious threats and into safe and useful outlets for the industrial system. Kaczynski explains that by tradition younger activists take up old causes like the fight against discrimination, and victimization issues, such as homophobia and racism, for example, and that these are causes that actually aid the System. This is because, with modern technologies like rapid, long-distance communication and transportation, it is in the System’s best interests that different types of people, who are now intermingling with one another, get along. Interracial and intersexual conflicts, for example, would impair the smooth, orderly functioning of the technological social machine. Thus, activists aid the System in fighting for these “causes,” and, by their extreme methods and proposed solutions to these “problems,” keep anger and frustration from more reactionary elements focused on them instead of on the System.
Conclusively, Technological Slavery is indeed “logical, lucid, and direct.” Furthermore, it is a volume of writings meticulously crafted and wrought with some of the most important and revolutionary ideas of our times. Dr. Kacznyki’s arguments remain air-tight and well-founded. With many sources and robust refutations of counter-arguments, Technological Savery stands as the quintessential volume for those critical of technology and of the society it has brought about.
b3114_c140's review
informative
reflective
medium-paced
4.75
After having finished Kaczynski's manifesto, I had almost expected Technological Slavery ("TS" for short) to be, more or less, a rehash. In reality, it was anything but— it proved to be a valuable elaboration on previously established anti-tech ideas, and taught me much about the life of primitive people.
The first chapter of the book is dedicated to a critique of anarcho-primitivism. I initially found it a boring read, and thought spending 60 pages on the topic was unnecessary. Now, my opinion has mellowed, and I see why Kaczynski decided to focus on debunking that myth. Many (who’ve indeed never read his works) call him an anarcho-primitivist ("anprim" for short) but he differs from one in both philosophy and method.
In short, anprims too often possess leftist characteristics, and consequently attempt to idealise primitive society. They, being leftists, are abhorred by violence, and consequently try to pretend primitive people engage in less (interpersonal) violence than we do, which is not quite true. Anarcho-primitivists also act as if pre-agricultural tribes existed in a utopia of social justice, equality, ethnic diversity and inclusion, which is absolutely absurd.
In addition, it should be noted that Kaczynski was not opposed to violence as a means to an end, whereas attitudes among anprims are overwhelmingly pacifist; they rarely argue for a revolution against technology in the first place. Indeed, anti-tech differs greatly from anarcho-primitivism, and the two ought to stay separate, so Kaczynski was right to dedicate a large part of TS on debunking the primitivist myth.
The other key point of the book is the “System’s Neatest Trick”, which succinctly explains a phenomenon which has been reduced to a daily occurrence in our society. Simply put, the modern left serves as a means to channel rebellious impulses that arise under the technological system into causes that actually play into the establishments’ needs. The Leftists advocate for some kind of ‘change’ (be it, for example, “empowering women”) which is strictly in the interest of the establishment (as in, in the interests of the technological system), while pretending to be social revolutionaries.
Issues such as women’s rights, race equality, etc. only serve to help the establishment, which can safely progress forwards. Meanwhile the response of reactionaries and conservatives to leftists’ activism tricks the leftists into thinking what they are advocating is truly at odds with the establishment, and, more importantly, the back-and-forth struggle between the leftists and their rightist counterparts helps distract attention from the real root cause of human misery and enslavement: technology itself. The System’s Neatest Trick goes to show how industrial society can waste the individual’s time on meaningless ‘struggles for freedom’ while benefiting itself. This has been the case for quite some time now, and it will probably continue to be so for a long time to come.
Technological Slavery was, as I alluded, the first of Kaczynski’s works I read after Industrial Society and its Future. It’s a crucial step for any serious anti-tech individual, and it has much more merit than shown in this brief review. TS contains numerous letters sent by (and to) Kaczynski, which provide another source of insight into his way of thinking.
There are some arguments about whether one should first read Technological Slavery or Anti-Tech Revolution (Ted’s third major work) after the manifesto. Ultimately, this is of minor significance. However, I would say reading TS first is more convenient and logical, as it actually starts with a more accurate version of the manifesto, without any of the publishing mistakes made back in 1995 by publishing outlets.
at_rob's review
dark
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
5.0
This collection of writings is one of the most complete treatments of the disaster that industrial society has wrought on humanity and the natural systems of the world. In addition to including the definitive version of Kaczynski’s "Industrial Society and its Future" (ISAIF), complete with notes and clarifications, it contains a collection of letters that expand on the points from that seminal work. The central message of the book is that the technoindustrial system needs to end as soon as possible. He examines the possibility of reforming the system so as to remain compatible with basic human dignity and discards it as a nonsensical fantasy. Additionally, basic guide posts are set for the coming revolutionary movement to organize themselves with so that they may pave the way to the collapse of industrial society.
Following the main text, "The System’s Neatest Trick" explores the way the technoindustrial system co-opts the rebellious tendencies expressed in modern society. It is an important observation that shows the transmutation of the fundamental dissatisfaction of individuals in society into their active participation in the advancement of the material causes of this very dissatisfaction. It is a warning to those who may otherwise want to effect the fundamental change endorsed in Technological Slavery, but feel that they must fight secondary causes. The text itself is also a convenient enough package to share with those who won’t initially touch ISAIF (aka, the “Unabomber Manifesto”), but who can be shaken awake with the revelation that the actions they are allowed to take from the menu of system-approved causes won’t do anything but further their enslavement. In his usual fashion, Kaczynski inspires hope even while outlining the insidious sophistication with which the system has built itself a pressure relief valve. His demonstration that the trick is not perfect, even backfiring and failing sometimes, is enough to show a stuttering machine that shows weakness.
Through his correspondence with David Skrbina, Kaczynski dismantles the idea that industrial society can be reformed so as to preserve human dignity and divert our course away from extinction. Kaczynski lists the very limited ways in which society can control its own outcomes and contrasts these with the lofty and impossible goals of committed technophiles, technophiles that see the impending disasters no less. A salient point that emerges from this discourse is the fact that those changes that may seem to be the result of successful reform efforts were actually baked in the cake; the “objective factors” of a given time dictated that the functioning of the system would be most efficient in some configuration. The emergence of democracy, the elimination of slavery in western nations, and measures taken on the most obvious signs of pollution, to take his examples, were all just the system finding the most efficient means to operate. A sense of your irrelevancy in the “progress” of society grows as you read. This culminates in the exposition of the immense and intractable problems of our day that our society has had more than enough time to address through reform such as horrific wars, propaganda, and the pathetic psychological state of the modern human to name a few. When reform continues to humiliate, revolution becomes the weapon to wield.
In his letter dated September 18, 2004, Kaczynski outlines what the nascent revolutionary movement should be focusing on. He stresses that the members cannot passively wait for the conditions of revolution to materialize and that they must push for it, sow dissension between the common man and the system, and be prepared to speak on the premier problem of our age: industrial society as a whole. Our arsenal is not empty, according to Kaczynski; we have the opportunity to fill a spiritual void left in the wake of industrialization, we have the reverence, on the part of a great deal of people, of wild nature, we have the discontentment that has grown to anger, and we can offer a community that can, arguably, have the greatest impact there will ever be on the human race. Just as with anything young, it must be protected while it is most vulnerable. This time, he states, is for building a nucleus away from leftists and lukewarm rebels. Admitting that these guidelines are only useful for a revolution that is possible in the first place, he offers his expert diagnosis on why it must come to be and why it can be.
Throughout his correspondence you find that the common denominator of all the issues that others bemoan, let alone what Kaczynski himself decries, is technological society itself. Maybe you’ve noticed the overcrowding of cities, our meager wage slave tasks being replaced by machines, the ever-present manipulation tactics deployed by the media, the shameless and open destruction of natural systems wherever industry touches, or our domestication. These problems, and all others, find their roots in the propagation of techniques as an end in itself. Kaczynski shows that we are a society freer than ever to have “fun,” but at the cost of the kind of freedom that is necessary for a truly fulfilling life which was abundant even in the time of serfdom. This material comfort, he says, is one of the most dangerous features of industrial society, for a placated mass is a docile and moldable one, and, as he shows, humans are not the ones designing the mold. Despite that, he explains that the system is coming to be, not only extremely complex, but also very tightly coupled such that it is becoming catastrophically vulnerable to relatively small disturbances. A boon for revolutionaries.
This book is an indispensable resource for the anti-tech movement and equips you to see the world as it really functions and where we stand within it, a terrific shake-up out of our learned helplessness.
potash's review
hopeful
inspiring
medium-paced
5.0
Technological Slavery Book Review
By Potash
Technological Slavery is the most unique of Kaczynski's three books. ISAIF and Anti-Tech Revolution are works focused on the problems of the technological system, how it cannot be reformed, and how it can be destroyed. Technological Slavery is more broadly focused. The book is primarily based on Kaczynski's letters to various correspondents on the issue of technology instead of his essays. This makes Technological Slavery a distinctive reading experience, which exposes us to Kaczynski’s ideas in a different way. This is the only one of his books where he directly addresses strategies others ask him about, answers their questions and debates defenders of the system. Technological Slavery introduces many new and important ideas, such as the concept of learned helplessness, the prevalence of natural selection among social groups, how the system uses leftism to take advantage of the rebellious instincts that many of us feel under such an oppressive system, and many more. Technological Slavery greatly expands your knowledge on many subjects relevant to anti-tech ideology and I firmly recommend it.
The conventional notion is that history is determined by an elevator of moral progress, in which we slowly but surely chose to make society more equitable and humane. Human intentions are the decisive factor in determining the course societies take–so the thinking goes–and they are thus responsible for the problems we face and therefore also have the potential to provide the reforms necessary to solve these problems. In other words, humans have primary agency in determining the course of society’s evolution over the long-term. “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice” - Martin Luther King. Technological Slavery thoroughly debunked this fairytale and proposes its own theory: history is dictated by objective conditions/natural selection rather than human intentions. Kaczynski argues that human intentions do not and cannot dictate the course of history, outside of 3 exceptions which he acknowledges at the start of the book. He also acknowledges that there are instances in which human intentions can have long-term consequences on society as a whole, but even in these cases what follows is not what the individuals who caused the change desired or expected. Natural selection among human societies works in a similar manner to natural selection in biology. Just as animals that have traits which allow them to best propagate themselves replace the animals without such traits, in human societies social groups with the traits that best allow them to propagate themselves replace social groups without such traits. There is however a difference between the two: among human societies natural selection also works through imitation rather than replacement alone. It is common for less successful social groups to imitate the traits of successful social groups.
The spread of democracy is often used as an example of human intentions changing the world for the better. It is widely accepted that democracy was adopted because of a desire for freedom, equality, and political representation. Kaczynski challenges this notion, and argues explains that the real reason democracy was adopted was because it was believed to be most conducive to economic prosperity and technological progress. When undemocratic regimes showed that they could achieve prosperity without democracy, interest in democracy was lost. So, the widespread adoption of democracy does not refute the theory of natural selection, but rather it is a prime example of it.
Kaczynski persuasively argues why and how natural selection has played, and will continue to play, a more important role in guiding the course of history than human intentions. Understanding the prevalence of natural selection among human societies is important because it exposes the impossibility of naive plans to reform the technological system.
Technological slavery provides further elaboration on the Ideas discussed in Industrial Society and It’s Future and provides many new ones as well. The Book is essential for a thorough understanding of the impacts technological development has on society, and how to counteract them.
laonikoss's review
adventurous
challenging
medium-paced
5.0
Ted Kaczynski has been much maligned by the government and media. He’s been painted as a crazy, mentally ill victim of “MK Ultra” whose ideas are just those of a troubled mind, and thus shouldn’t be taken seriously. However, as the techno-industrial system continues on its downward path, more and more people are recognizing that this narrative is false, that his ideas have value, and are checking out his writing.
Technological Slavery is a collection of his writing which includes the manifesto, “Industrial Society and its Future” (ISAIF), as well as smaller essays and many letters which expand on the ideas expressed in ISAIF. He saw the four main points of all these writings as:
- “Technological progress is carrying us to inevitable disaster…
- Only the collapse of modern technological civilization can avert disaster…
- The political left is technological society’s first line of defense against revolution...
- What is needed is a new revolutionary movement, dedicated to the elimination of technological society…” -Ted Kaczynski, Technological Slavery, Volume One (2022), pp. 5-7
Besides ISAIF, the best piece of writing in this book is called “The System’s Neatest Trick.” In it, he explains that the techno-industrial system needs constant, rapid social change to fit with constant, rapid economic/technological change, and that people naturally feel inclined to rebel against the system. The system, seeing the rebellious impulses which might challenge it, captures this rebellious energy and redirects these impulses into instead supporting and strengthening it and furthering its ends. For instance, the system requires harmony between people of different races and religions, as it needs them to work harmoniously together and not upset the stability necessary for its smooth functioning by feuding. Then the “rebel,” instead of genuinely challenging the system in any way, says that the system is racist and needs to change, or not anti-racist enough, and tries to make it more anti-racist. These “rebels” thus assert that society isn’t going far enough in the direction in which the system is already pushing it. They may tell themselves they’re doing good, or “challenging close-minded assumptions,” or whatever else, but in reality all they’re doing is fighting as the “radical” vanguard of the system. The same is true for most other leftist social causes, from feminism to gay and lesbian rights. A side-effect of this process is that many people who resent the dramatic social changes ushered in by the technological system have their attention and resentment distracted away from the system itself and redirected instead at this vanguard of pseudo-radicals who are focused on the most by the media, and are both more open and easier targets. In the meantime, genuinely radical movements are either ruthlessly attacked by the media (with the approval of these pseudo-radicals) or else efficiently suppressed by the system with the assistance of this process.
Ted’s other pieces of writing cover topics like why mental illness rates are higher in techno-industrial societies than primitive ones, why democracy is dominant in the modern world, why religiosity declines in techno-industrial societies, and many others. For someone who has never read Ted before, it’s best to get this book, read the manifesto, then read whatever else in this book sounds interesting. I would also recommend someone who has only read ISAIF to read this book for a broader sense of his ideas. If you had any objections to specific points, it’s likely that he expanded on those points and addressed your concerns somewhere in here. If you wholeheartedly agree with ISAIF, he expands on what must be done.
kazimir_kharza's review
dark
emotional
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
fast-paced
4.5
I have often encountered people who are curious about the ideas of Dr. Theodore John Kaczynski and ask which one of his books they should read first. Most of them decide to pick up Industrial Society and its Future first, not knowing that ISAIF is included in its entirety inside the first volume of Technological Slavery (TS). I suggest getting this book over any stand-alone copy of ISAIF because they’re often based on the Washington Post’s version which was never proofread before publication and contains several errors and omissions. Often new mistakes were added with each transcription too. The reader can be assured that there are no errors or omissions in this edition, as the publishers worked directly with Kaczynski on this book.
In addition, TS vol. 1 is an excellent book because it contains many other works and letters that greatly expand on many points made in ISAIF. After Kaczynski was captured by the FBI after a nearly 20 year-long manhunt, many people, including a philosophy professor from the University of Michigan, were intrigued by his manifesto and initiated a correspondence. Far from being mere casual letters, these writings are well thought out, researched and laid down clearly and systematically. Some of the topics he writes about in greater detail include the motivations of scientists, why reform is impossible and only a revolution can actually get rid of the technological system, how the system co-opts rebellious impulses of its subjects, what the future might look like if the march of technology is not halted, etc.
In ISAIF certain ideas were explained far more briefly than others. For example, while Kaczynski clearly explains why people engage in surrogate activities, and subsequently claims that most scientific and engineering work is the result of people’s pursuit of meaning and a sense of self-worth and control, he does not list any concrete cases in the manifesto. Kaczynski’s view of what motivates scientists to do their work goes against the common narrative that scientists are heroes, who do their work primarily for the betterment of humanity. In a letter responding to a person who pushed back on the validity of his claims about the motivations of scientists, he backs them by consulting psychologists, historic literature, and the testaments of scientists and technicians themselves.
When he asked two psychologists about what motivates people to do scientific work, e.g. in the field of psychology, both of them agreed that the large majority are driven by personal needs that have little to do with serving humankind. This seems to be confirmed by, for example, the behavior displayed by Wenher von Braun who designed the deadly V2 rockets for Hitler’s regime during WWII. Despite proclaiming that his research was motivated by deep patriotism, von Braun and his colleagues chose to surrender to the USA, knowing they could probably go overseas and continue developing rockets. Kaczynski also points to examples of physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer, electrical engineer Werner von Siemens, bacteriologist Hans Zinsser, and Albert Einstein himself; all of the aforementioned men of science expressed at some point that they don’t buy into the myth of altruistic humanitarians. Einstein in particular confessed that he felt a compulsion to do his work, seeking in it an escape from the harsh world and searching for fulfillment. This compulsion was so powerful that despite having written in 1917 about technological progress and civilization as being comparable to “an axe in the hand of a pathological criminal,” he continued to do what he did for decades.
Einstein was by far not the only one who irresponsibly worked on theory he knew would have dangerous and harmful consequences. In another letter in the book, “Letter to Scientific American” (1995), Kaczynski points out the selfish carelessness with which physicists use particle accelerators, knowing fully well that these technologies could potentially trigger a runaway reaction, causing a disaster of unprecedented scale. Their persistent willingness to play Russian roulette, often behind the public’s back, demonstrates perfectly that human welfare doesn’t sit on the top of their list of priorities.
Those scientists who aren’t just in pursuit of fulfillment through work itself are more often than not motivated by promises of social prestige and wealth, Kaczynski points out. Academic fraud and corruption have been rampant in many fields, the latter being especially prominent in research of subjects with strong political and economic implications. If there are genuinely altruistic scientists out there, they’re likely an insignificant minority. Even if they have what they think are good intentions though, they seldom dwell much on the likely outcome of their work, and just impotently advocate “responsible” use of their discoveries.
What’s written in TS vol. 1 shows that even the briefer remarks the author makes are far from groundless, and demonstrates the rigorous character of his opus. Kaczynski’s later works should get far more attention than they presently get.
genesis1999's review
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
5.0
Over a decade after the publication of his noteworthy essay, “Industrial Society and Its Future,” Theodore Kaczynski followed up with another remarkable work continuing his explication of technological progress and its encroachment on human freedom, in which the title succinctly encapsulates as Technological Slavery. Kaczynski’s ideas and novel concepts are expanded upon through various essays and letters written to correspondents; one in which includes ecophilosopher and author, David Skrbina, where Kaczynski discusses his position of revolution over reform.
One of the many compelling letters incorporated within this book that I find especially significant goes by the title, “Letter to Dr. P.B. on the Motivations of Scientists.” Kaczynski expounds on one of the points made in his manifesto which argued that scientists are primarily motivated by their own self-interest rather than out of desire to help humanity. A correspondent that went by the initials, “P.B.” contested this, referencing notable scientists such as Albert Einstein as an example of someone who contradicts this position. What follows is a very informative response where Kaczynski uses historical evidence to give credence to his assertion on the true motivations of scientists.
Kaczynski notes that Albert Einstein preached in favor of “world peace” only after and apart from his scientific work, and his autobiography is revealing: Einstein highlighted the emptiness he felt as a child and his distaste for the everyday work-life of his time, in which scientific work provided solace from. Motivated not by altruism, but by a desire to fill the void he experienced from a lack of sufficient challenges and goals to pursue.
J. Robert Oppenheimer, a physician credited for the research and design of the atomic bomb, further articulated this sentiment during a speech he delivered in 1945 that was addressed to the scientists who had participated in the project. Oppenheimer did not shy away from spouting a mantra of flowery excuses for why the research was important for the sake of mankind, but in the same speech he stressed that scientists' work served a personal need or an “organic necessity,” expressing that the acquisition of knowledge was essentially an end in itself, independently of whether it had any positive impact upon humanity.
Theodore Kaczynski cleverly confronts the argument which holds that technology is morally neutral. While he acknowledges technology is neutral in the abstract sense, the development of a new technology has a concrete effect on the society in which one lives. He uses the example of engineer Wernher Von Braun, who helped build weapons for Adolf Hitler. Von Braun emphasized the impartiality of scientific research and contended that it held no moral dimensions in and of itself until its products were further utilized. It would be rather naive though to believe Von Braun was not fully aware of what his research would entail. The stance that society should have used a technology in a different way does not remove responsibility from those who developed it. A scientist is obligated to consider the ramifications of how a new technology is likely to interact with society. They must ask not how their work can or should be used, but how it will be used-and if this cannot be answered their work is grossly irresponsible.
A recent example of this was seen with the release of a letter signed by multiple tech experts, that called for a 6-month pause on AI research back in March of 2023. The letter outlined some of the serious consequences that could arise from its advancements. Of course this letter never intended for there to ever be a complete halt to AI research and its proposal never went underway. It is evident that scientists are not blind to the foreseeable circumstances that technological progress could impose, but as Kaczynski argues, they do not let these considerations interfere with their research.
Intelligent, insightful, and compelling; Technological Slavery is a must-read that allows the reader to take a more critical outlook on the technological developments within our society and to question where it is taking us. The arguments the author presents are well-thought out and well-constructed. If you like what you read, I would recommend putting Theodore Kaczynski’s book, Anti-Tech Revolution: Why and How, next up on your reading list.
murph51's review
challenging
informative
reflective
medium-paced
5.0
Environmental reform is doomed to fail. Only by creating a global revolution will we be able to throw off the shackles of industrial society. In this, his first book, Technological Slavery, which greatly expands on and elaborates many of the points made in the manifesto, “Industrial Society and Its Future,” Theodore Kaczynski provided many compelling arguments as to why industrial society is impervious to reform and is only changeable through revolution. His arguments for this fact can be broken down into three categories: historical, psychological, and practical, ultimately showing that we cannot change the world with anything less than a complete revolt against the industrial system.
The first point made by Mr. Kaczynski is historical. In the French Revolution, people who would typically be apathetic became emboldened and assisted in overthrowing the monarchy. Another example is the Russian Revolution, where a small group of committed revolutionaries waited many years before they had a chance to spark a revolution. When they finally did, they were able to overthrow the Russian imperial government. These historical revolutions provide a historical precedent for wide sweeping changes being brought about by revolution. On the other hand, it is pointed out by Kaczynski that there is no precedent for extensive piecemeal reforms being effective. While reforms can change things in society or government (like women gaining rights in the United States), this kind of change only assists technological society by, for example, adding more skilled, educated workers dedicated to furthering the spread of industrial progress. No reform has meaningfully regressed technological society for any appreciable amount of time.
The second category of argument falls under the psychological reasons for revolution. As a psychological baseline, most people are apathetic to the climate, the planet's health, how their neighbor feels, etc. People generally only care about things that are happening right in front of them and are actively affecting their lives. This needs to be addressed when finding a solution to any problem requiring the participation of many people. As mentioned in the historical section of this essay, in the example of the Russian Revolution, it only took a small number of committed members of the revolution to get it moving. Small groups of committed members can start revolutions: a problem can be forced into the eye of the public and be made the pressing issue that causes people to take sides in an earnest and committed way. Being a member of a revolutionary force also inspires people to take more risks. These emboldened revolutionaries can act in the more extreme ways that are required and are more likely to take on and overcome personal hardships for the sake of the revolution. For example, a reformer would be willing to compromise and allow some fossil fuel use for electricity generation because it is unthinkable to live without such a thing in current society, while a revolutionary would not bend their convictions.
Finally, there are some practical reasons why a revolution is more likely to succeed over a series of reforms. The first and most apparent problem with reforms is that they require a majority vote to be effective. Because of the tools technological society has at its disposal: propaganda, global news, big business, etc. It is impossible to attain a majority vote to dismantle or seriously harm this system. A revolution, on the other hand, can be executed with a much smaller fraction of the population to much more significant effects. Reforms can also be undone. A reformer must win a long series of battles in order to achieve success. If any of these battles are lost, all of their efforts can be undone quite easily in the long term. Meanwhile, a revolution has only to win one battle: the dismantling of industrial society.
I highly recommend this book if you want to learn more about how societies evolve and how we can confront the full implications of technological progress on nature and society. But it is particularly insightful in understanding why reform of technological society is impossible and revolution to end it is the only logical, rational course of action open to us.