I'm going to read it once my exams are over. I never thought about Unabomber having more than a murderous agenda. I'm a liberal (I know there are different subcategories of liberalism, but I'm not educated in those), but I've always been interested in why the other side thinks the way they do. When I was younger, I was opposed to people having different views: how could they? Now I've become curious. I'm interested in what he has to say. People – and viewpoints – are complex. Even Hitler had good points, nationalistic as they were: his physical education policy for children and teenagers was spot-on.
Well, and you gotta remember that the "Liberalism" that he is railing against is the Reagan-era definition of liberalism... and on the political spectrum today, Reagan the neocon is slightly LEFT of Hillary Clinton. In the 1980's, the type of psychotic "conservatism" that is common Republican policy today, was the platform of the anti-state militias, like the Michigan Militia. So when you read it, realize that his type of "conservativism" is essentially Clintonism.