Talk:Unabomber for President

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Philosophy      (Rated Start-Class) Philosophy Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale. Additional information: Related task forces (major traditions): Anarchism WikiProject Elections and Referenda      (Rated Start-Class) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referenda, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decisionmaking. For more information, visit our project page. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. WikiProject United States presidential elections (Rated Start-Class) This article is within the scope of the United States presidential elections WikiProject. This project provides a central approach to United States presidential elections-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

A fact from Unabomber for President appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 13 April 2008.

The following user(s) are actively contributing to this article and may be able to help with questions about verification and sources: Skomorokh (talk · contribs) This in no way implies article ownership; all editors are encouraged to contribute.

[edit] Pacifists for the Unabomber?

I'm confused about why a pacifist would support the Unabomber. I know the claim is cited to the NYT and part of a quote from Eccles, but it doesn't make sense to me. Maybe the article should indicate that it's a quote from her, rather than a verified fact? (The rest of the supporters don't seem out of place to me; but I just can't wrap my brain around pacifists for mail bombs.) – Scartol • Tok 15:38, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps these pacifists don't support the unabomber, but the "unabomber for president" campaign.Maziotis (talk) 17:25, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

That doesn't make any more sense to me. If pacifists believe that violence is a neverending spiral of destruction and despair, why would they want someone who has willfully used violence to spread his ideology to become president? Isn't it more likely that someone was fast and loose with her words whilst promoting the campaign to the NYT? – Scartol • Tok 02:04, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

<original research> I think, with respect, you may have missed to point of the "campaign" - it was not a Ron Paul-like grassroots effort at advancing the election prospects of an election candidate; it was more akin to a Situationist/surrealist political art stunt. The campaigners were not motivated by a desire to have Kaczynski as Commander-in-Chief, but were declaring a hearty "fuck you" to the charade of a "democracy" in which people turned up at a polling booth every four years to elect their leader.</original research> The latter half of the article and of this essay might be instructive on this point. The material in the article does not need to be changed given the existing sources, but the emphasis might need tweaking if yours is the impression most readers get. Skomorokh 02:24, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] So...

How many votes did he get? MookieZ (talk) 02:40, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting question. Does the American presidential election oversight body publish the number of votes garnered by write-in candidates? Given the U.S. government's reputation for integrity in electoral proceedings it is probably hopelessly naive to expect a useful answer on that question. Skomorokh 02:53, 14 April 2008 (UTC)