Intellectual Dark Web
- Started
- Last post
- 199 Responses
- uan0
the knowledge is available, he describes where we are at and hopefully will go as 'humanz'.
- sted0
- MrAbominable0
I think the question is "what's the point"? And from what I've heard it's a pretty loose affiliation of long-form people who often have differing povs. Rogan jokingly refers to it as the "dork web".
Many of them make great points, often contradictory to each other and the format is taking hold because sound-bites aren't a very good arena for anything other than exhaustion.
- fadein110
Sell that domain hippy!
- Morning_star-3
@yuekit
— How does one objectively classify whether someone is right wing or far right?
Why do you need to? It becomes quite obvious from what the say and how they act. Assuming guilt by association is a disturbing and destructive feature of dictatorial, oppressive, fascist, communist, racist, totalitarian, regimes. Your assumptions generate an opinion based on false information. It’s valueless.
— This gets to the heart of what annoys me about the "IDW" movement -- there seems to be an effort to normalize far right views while pretending that the left is super extreme due to a handful of crazy feminists. That is not logical or reasonable.
In that last comment Yuekit you demonstrated exactly what the research claims to show. Rather than start a discussion or challenge the creators you paint something as ‘harmful’ or ‘far right’ without any rational analysis. I’ll challenge you to bring one example of your claim that the members of the IDW are normalising far right views. (My suspicion is that your definition of ‘far right’ is so broad as to tarnish those that are merely attempting to open up a discussion in good faith)
It seems the only thing that you’ve managed to extract from the article after dismissing the conclusions (why?) is a largely irrelevant point about the content of Shapiro’s website. You seem happy enough to group people together and judge them with unsophisticated stereotyping if they don’t fall comfortably into your political safe space but you claim racism and discrimination when someone makes a similar point about the issues faced by, for example, black communities or gender based groups.
We need to be able to discuss these issues openly and in good faith. Nothing should be taboo. How do you expect to address the problems of sexual harassment or equal opportunity or violent crime when many won’t engage because of a misguided and prejudiced ‘group think’ assumption.
- A great example would be Dave Rubin's recent comment (while interviewing a far-right, anti-immigrant Canadian politician) that because the left is so terrible,yuekit
- he can't blame people if they embrace actual ethnonationalism.yuekit
- That is a completely absurd view, but it perfectly captures the skewed framing that goes on with many of these guys -- painting the left in the harshest termsyuekit
- possible, while giving a sympathetic platform to extremes on the other side.yuekit
- this might be an interesting dialogue if the troll knob was dialed waaaay down.MrAbominable
- @yuekit. Replied in another post.Morning_star
- palimpsest0
@shapesalad
/watch?v=
- PhanLo0
Tim Pool's sister think's the person who used to be her brother is gone and some other personality inhabits his beanie hat clad body.
-
- Morning_star-3
i_monk
This video should add a little more illumination to what he thinks about the subject. It pretty much provides explanation and further insight to all the points you made below.
Could you explain the perception you have about an agenda, and what you think it is? I'm curious.
- He's an edgelord with tenure. That's about it.garbage
- ‘Edgelord’ ? Can provide one iota of evidence for your claim?Morning_star
- Again, what does raising kids have to do with two men or two women wanting to marry? They don't hand you a baby when you exchange rings.i_monk
- And why does he ignore the role of the extended family? That is a much older "traditional mode of being" than the model he holds up as a template.i_monk
- This is one of his Q&A sessions. They're all available on his you tube channel. He was asked "What are your thoughts on gay people raising children" which i...Morning_star
- ...am certain is the reason he talks about same sex marriage. I'd imagine the reason why he doesn't talk about extended family is because he has limited time...Morning_star
- ...and a lot of questions to get through. Why are you so hell bent on trying to explain his opinions as dangerous or sinister or manipulative. I don't get it.Morning_star
- He uses raising kids as a reason gays shouldn't be allowed to marry, demonstrating his agenda quite clearly.i_monk
- Whenever his position on gay marriage is pointing out, one of his followers tries to pivot the discussion to raising kids.i_monk
- Being married ≠ having kids. Having kids ≠ being married.i_monk
- It's an excuse to justify inequality.i_monk
- Morning_star-4
I wonder how this is gonna pan out for Cambridge University.
Not well, I guess.
Peterson was invited to be a visiting fellow at Cambridge Uni. The the invitation was rescinded due to the reaction from the Student Union. Who said..."Peterson isn’t welcome at Cambridge because it’s an ‘inclusive environment’.
I was under the impression that a university IS the place to challenge ideas.
- best part is cambridge inferring that it was peterson who made the requestGnash
- can't really blame them. it must be exhausting to be nursing all the traumatized kids endlessly.Gnash
- puppy rooms aren't cheapGnash
- Imagine someone challenging your ideas....the horror.Morning_star
- although, JP has to take responsibility for nurturing a brand that thrives on the controversy.Gnash
- I'm not sure he'd agree with that. It's only seems controversial because of the Left's stubborn adherence to dogma and ideology. The inability to reflect...Morning_star
- ...analyse and adapt is disheartening.Morning_star
- yet he does things like the Lobster Collection. Not for the money, but to (very successfully) wind-up the left and get them tweeting about him.Gnash
- It quite devious actually. the herd are all having this "gotcha" moment and he's just playing with them. That signals to me that he's kinda working it.Gnash
- Not that he shouldn't, but in context of, cap. "A", Academia, the cambridge situation isn't that surprising.Gnash
- Agreed. I've seen him deny that he's a provocateur. But, the lobster stuff and some recent appearances would suggest he's getting a little more 'playful'.Morning_star
- I've read from people at Cambridge that it wasn't just a case of stroppy students insisting he be no-platformed.Fax_Benson
- Dish the dirt Fax, what do you know?Morning_star
- don't know anything - just that Divinity SU is one part of one of 30 colleges that make up the university and not as simple as Cambridge bans JPFax_Benson
- someone at Cambridge was saying the offer was hastily given then withdrawn on review. I agree banning academics from Unis is dumb as rocks, just to clarify.Fax_Benson
- JP's views aren't controversial. I'm honestly baffled. He's a boring Canadian professor. The world has gone mad if this is the enemy.inteliboy
- Though the left love eating themselves alive. This is why the right have that
'smug' look, deservedly so.inteliboy
- PhanLo0
Ben should like Barbie, her fanny is as dry as his wife's.
Not sure why he's dressed as a gang meber from police Academy either.
-
- Morning_star-3
Get your ears around this if you can spare some time.
Bret Weinstein and Richard Dawkins talk evolution, religion and some other stuff.- I am genuinely interested in all this, but in general, you need hours every time. Being concise is a good thing, no?MrT
- I think a lot of these discussions are learning and discovery events for the participators. They have no idea how they will concluded and as such they are...Morning_star
- This was really interesting. At times I thought Weinstein was way out of his depth against Dawkins, but fuck, then he pulls some fascinating theories aboutIanbolton
- ...difficult to summarise without losing the inherent value in the format. I tend to digest them whilst doing other stuff, cooking or travelling mainly.Morning_star
- how tribalism and war could be a certain aspect of human evolution and how Catholicism is ... erm, I lost it there!Ianbolton
- I like it when Dawkins get's so wound up. He's such a cunt at times!Ianbolton
- Morning_star-2
Give it a listen. Very, very interesting.
This is an interview with Bret Weinstein about the discussion he had with Richard Dawkins (about 6 posts down). He very eloquently points out Dawkins error in the Selfish Gene.
Weinstein argues that religion, warfare, genocide etc are evolutionary features built into our genes. And that we must realise we (humans) are monsters and should adjust our direction accordingly.
- Love listening to Bret. Especially how calm and knowledgable he is. He might be my favorite among the IDW group. Always nice to listen to him explain.Boz
- Morning_star-3
Throughly recommend giving this a listen.
Eric Weinstein explains the purpose and genesis of the IDW, and how the growth of a new ideological worldview has made it necessary.
- "Rebel Wisdom" lolyuekit
- Movie trailer voice: The knowledge they don't want you to know. In a place they don't want you to see.Fax_Benson
- Morning_star-6
Hey kids, take a step outside of your echo chamber.
Contains measured perspective and some rational insight into the IDW.
- I was about to have lunch but I'll skip that and take 2 hours of my day to stay woke.
Thanks!soundofreason - Dude, I wouldn't bother. You seem comforted by the knowledge you're right.Morning_star
- are these people paid by the word? 4 mins in and guy on the right has introduced 2 unnecessary metaphors to explain something straightforward which the guy onFax_Benson
- the left explains in plain English. It's like a vampire. It's like a shell. No it isn't.Fax_Benson
- Dude, I was 20" in and went to take a pee break. You're taking this the wrong way.soundofreason
- I know I've been living a lie all of life. I'm glad this stuff is available for everybody on the web. Kudos!soundofreason
- @Fax_Benson, you need to watch the whole thing, man! You've been conditioned to only take in tidbits. I'm 20 minutes in and it's just warming up.soundofreason
- Apologies, SOR.Morning_star
- rubin is annoying. spends 90% of his time complaining about the people complaining about him.inteliboy
- "step outside your echo chamber" = "step inside my echo chamber"i_monk
- I was about to have lunch but I'll skip that and take 2 hours of my day to stay woke.
- Morning_star-3
Jack Dorsey talks to Sam Harris.
It's very good and insightful. Listen to it. Go on.
- tried this. haven't found the right hook to enjoy Harris yet but more importantly couldn't listen to Twitter whinge about being Twitter. had to bail.MrAbominable
- There's a bit in Rogans latest podcast with Harris where he talks about the interview. Harris seems to think that Dorsey is an artful question dodger.Morning_star
- ^ maybe i'll try via that. i agree. the bit i caught was a sort of mea culpa about how Tw can do better. Yeah ok.MrAbominable
- listening now. my vote is still out on Harris. He's a bit too much like me in temperament which i usually hate. still working on it.MrAbominable
- ^The Tim Pool #1242 is my favorite of the Tw analysis.MrAbominable
- Morning_star-5
A link below to an article which discusses analysis of YouTubers political preferences and some illumination of the untruths perpetuated into mainstream media and politics.
It doesn’t surprise me that this is one of the conclusions.
“The harmfulness of a video seems to be a factor of the viewer’s politics more than the video itself.”
It goes on to suggest that the truth about a YouTubers political position is largely ignored in favour of the veiwers uninformed perception and prejudices.
...“There seems to be a higher proportion of reactionary anti-social justice content compared to other platforms, and many YouTubers focus on the most extreme actions of progressive activists — unfairly labeling this as indicative of “the left.”
Despite this, calls for censorship... are intolerant, partisan, and extreme. Their targets include centrist and mainstream right commentators (e.g. Joe Rogan, Ben Shapiro, Dennis Prager) and they offer no viewpoint-neutral rules of what an acceptable YouTube video is. The justification offered is that their videos are “harmful” — a concept that has crept so far that it is almost meaningless.”...
It goes some way to illustrate that the outrage of social justice fans, left-leaning dogooders and neocommunists is based in ugly fantasy rather than reality.
Beauty is truth. Truth is beauty.
- How does one objectively classify whether someone is right wing or far right?yuekit
- This gets to the heart of what annoys me about the "IDW" movement -- there seems to be an effort to normalize far right views while pretending that the left isyuekit
- super extreme due to a handful of crazy feminists. That is not logical or reasonable.yuekit
- ^ re your question. You have obviously managed to classify what views are far-right -- and therefor those that hold those views are so.Gnash
- How have you done that objectively?Gnash
- There is not a clear cut definition, but at one point most people agreed Breitbart (the publication Ben Shapiro edited) was far right -- now according to theyuekit
- article Morning_star linked, Shapiro is a "centrist" or a "mainstream conservative." His site literally had a section devoted to "black crime" and he reportedyuekit
- to Steve Bannon every day -- is that mainstream in your view? And same thing with the efforts of IDW shows like as the Rubin Report to present the views ofyuekit
- open racists such as Stefan Molyneux without criticism, while droning on about how terrible the left is.yuekit
- Regardless of whether there is a bright line in terms of what is far right or not (and of course there isn't), I find that pretty reprehensible.yuekit
- @yuekit. I’ve responded to you in a separate post.Morning_star
- If you think Prager is a centrist, your calibration is waaaaayyyy off.BonSeff
- Rogan is more of a pragmatist
Shapiro is a straight up grifter, as is Rubin.BonSeff - All of the above tho have women issues.
Isn't Prager the only one who is married? To his like third wife?BonSeff - So all the good left people have never been divorced? and divorced men are all right-wing misogynists? so objectiveGnash
- no, they are divorced as well, but don't go around shilling for their book interpretation of the bible. feel me?BonSeff
- Last time I checked Christian marriage vows are a personal contract to God.BonSeff
- Last time I checked Christian marriage vows are a personal contract to God.BonSeff
- Plus Prager promotes women begrudgingly sexing up their man, because the bible.BonSeff
- Hardly centrist was my long way around the cul de sac of making an observation. Sorry, just got off a very long flight.BonSeff
- I listen to conservative talk radio here in Texas because it's so wack. I get probably, maybe four hours of Prager's show a week. Dude is nuts.BonSeff
- so if you find out that shapiro seems to be happily married to his only wife, you'd concede he has no problem with women? since he's neither divorced or xtianGnash
- I will concede. lucky for him there is a contingent of women down with umpaloopas. i'm sure their marriage is dandyBonSeff
- OH! Curious about your takes on Candice Owens? Is she down with IDW?BonSeff
- not heard of owens, I'd have to google her.Gnash
- Seriously?BonSeff
- is that bad?Gnash
- ok, just googled her. she looks familiar but don't know anything about her. but I'm not american and I don't watch foxGnash
- Yeah dude, she is the black Tomi, down with nationalism, getting in Hitler's head. bananasBonSeff
- *looks up, Tomi*Gnash
