If the “Intellectual Dark Web” is being silenced, why must w

Post Reply New Topic

It's fine , as long as you just want to listen to a calm voiced podcast, or to join a community after escaping some religious cult.
They should not be treated as political influencers, it's a disservice to themselves first and foremost.

I don't think it's a movement, it seems like it's a bunch of left-center and right-center thinkers who'd score high on the social libertarian axis of the political four-quadrant test finding joy and fascination that they can talk about heady things, across the isle, listen to each other and even disagree on big issues without resorting to invective, and asking the question - since the authoritarian left and right can't stand each other, could the more social-libertarian left and right actually be the future of civic discourse and communal sense-making? With Sam, Ben, Jordan, Bret, and Eric it's also speaking up and raising the dialog above what it's been able to be in broader discourse. The most I can say about Joe is he's an entertainer, I think Styx said it well that he's a sort of modern Howard Stern with a broader interest palate and it has more to do with the quality of his guests and his ability to get them through these 3-hr sit downs and talk out what they think and what they're up to.

As for why I picked that post out, I think it's because you were the person I was most surprised to see walking out the OP. I really got the impression, just due to there being no evidence to the contrary, that people in this thread were accepting the OP article and claim on face value without doing any homework of their own. I try not to lose my temper that much but when it comes to sloth-based political opinions going around it gets really tough, based on just... I know know... how disrespectful to the actual truth of matters it is.

Anyone who thinks this motley bunch of pseudointellectuals has anything profound to say for the betterment of society is a few sandwiches short of a picnic.

Anyone who actually knows anything about these people wouldn't take much stock in your opinion, nor your author's.

Something even stranger that I think this thread might have helped uncover, this might be the first time in my now 12, maybe 13 years, on Wrongplanet where we've been completely fresh out of fedora-tipping atheists and card-carrying skeptics. I say that not just for how topics on the paranormal just get ignored, or loaded up with psychobabble, rather than ridiculed but we now have a thread, this one, that calls a healthy portion of their role-models conspiracy theorists and loons, and the one guy holding the OP to account wouldn't pass the Michael Shermer litmus test in a million years.

I just verified that it was Eric Weinstein who coined the term Intellectual Dark Web (also someone else whose quite far from batisht crazy or stupid).

So what's this about Sam and Milo and how does this mean that Sam is endorsing him if it was Eric who came up with the phrase in the first place?

This conversation is turning into a free acid trip.

So what?

I've been listening to nearly all of them for the past couple years. That's why I find this whole thing so hilarious. I actually know what it is they have to say and their level of knowledge on their topics. At the worst people can accuse Jordan Peterson of being a bit of a mystic for his fandom of Jung, past that....lol, fail. This is a really a list of people who could kill anyone in a debate that they could throw at them - so NYT et al has to resort to this kind of juvenile crap.

People can run hit-pieces and yeah, plenty of people will swallow it hook, line, and sinker without doing any investigation for themselves. Other people won't do that, and that fraction is a lot more probably than know about them already so this will actually work out massively in their favor.

I just read the NYT article and it was weirder than I thought, really more weird than anything that the whole styling of it and the photo ops looked hit-piecy and the writing was tough to call, ie. it did showcase slivers about them, it also got really strange when talking about 'clicks', like being a 'click' away from Molyneux, Yanopolis, or Cernovich - the association's pretty weak (what - you can find them across a chain of retweets?) and at that, I'm still not sure where I'm at on calling Molyneux alt-right. Having heard Vox Day, Greg Evanson, Richard Spencer, would never fit in the same room with them, and he's much closer to a libertarian than anything else (I think he claims An-Cap if I'm not mistaken). Seems Harris won't go near Molyneux because he thinks the guy's politically radioactive. Harris also just issued an apology for one of his recent guess, and ex-white supremecist and de-radicalizion counselor, Christian Piciollini, who called both James Damore and Stefan Molyneux alt-right based on what he'd heard from the SPLC. While I was glad he gave that apology I was still surprised, not that he said that he wasn't endorsing Molyneux because he's said that before but that he said he knew little too little about James Damore to vet him either - being in his line of business, making a statement like that, and trying to pass it off as something other than a liability blanket is tough.

Back when I was in grad school, pre mom days, I spent a lot of time in bars doing trivia with my motley group of friends. The trivia competition got intense and all serious teams started loading up with autists who had different special interests. It was usually between my friends and these L33T programmers. Whoever would win usually depended on how many autists showed up to bat that night. It was rough when not many where around. Or if we lost a team member for the night who was the only one with, say, chemistry knowledge.

WP sometimes feels like an empty night at the bar. A certain kind of autist seems to be off the forum and preoccupied with something else. I presume they will be back to home base eventually.