Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Sunday May 13 2018, @03:39AM   Printer-friendly
from the I-don't-agree-with-it,-but-I-will-defend-your-right-to-say-it dept.

[janrinok] For those of you who do not want to read about the 'extremes' of US politics (alt-right or left-wing) I suggest that you skip this story and wait for the next one. If you feel that we shouldn't publish any story that does not accord with your own, probably less extreme, views then perhaps you should remind yourself that we try to give everyone in our community the benefit of free speech and we do not intentionally censor or promote any particular view or political leaning. Of course, you are welcome to contribute your own comments in the subsequent discussion that will follow.

This MSNBC Guest Just Showed Why The Intellectual Dark Web Exists

On Tuesday, The New York Times’ Bari Weiss appeared on MSNBC’s Morning Joe to discuss her new in-depth piece on the so-called Intellectual Dark Web – an agglomeration of thinkers from all sides of the political aisle who have been cast out by political correctness and now converse with one another regularly and publicly (full disclosure: I’m a charter member, along with friends including Sam Harris, Eric Weinstein, Joe Rogan, Jordan Peterson, and others). The entire premise of the IDW is that many on the Left refuse to acknowledge good-natured disagreement; instead, all disagreement must be due to nefarious evil on the part of those who disagree.

Proving the point on MSNBC was guest Eddie Glaude Jr., chair at the Center for African-American Studies at Princeton. When Weiss cited the discussions between me and Sam as evidence for the diversity of the movement, Glaude responded, “What allows you to describe these folks as intellectuals of sort? Let me say it differently. They’re connected intellectually by what common commitments? So you might have different ideological spaces, but when you talk about Sam Harris and Ben Shapiro in one sentence, I can see the connection between those two.” Weiss responded, logically enough, “Which is?” And Glaude explained:

Having something to do with how they think about race, having something to do with how they think about diversity in the country and the ways in which diversity is talked about, right? The way in which they think about political correctness. Weiss responded, “Yeah, they’re anti-identity politics, for sure.”

To which Glaude launched into a full defense of identity politics: “Identity politics is a phrase that kind of is a red herring. Identity politics is just simply questions of justice, right?”

At this point, Joe Scarborough jumped in and hit the nail directly on the head:

Eddie, you have just made Bari Weiss's point, that you disagree with the way Bari Weiss views the world, so you're going to help her view the world more the way you view the world. The entire purpose of the exercise is to have honest conversations with people, and to not question their morality, or their wisdom just because they don't view the world exactly the same way that you do.

The "Intellectual Dark Web," Explained: What Jordan Peterson has in Common with the Alt-Right

Bari Weiss, an opinion writer and editor at the New York Times, created a stir this week with a long article on a group that calls itself the "Intellectual Dark Web." The coinage referred to a loose collective of intellectuals and media personalities who believe they are "locked out" of mainstream media, in Weiss's words, and who are building their own ways to communicate with readers.

The thinkers profiled included the neuroscientist and prominent atheist writer Sam Harris, the podcaster Dave Rubin, and University of Toronto psychologist and Chaos Dragon maven Jordan Peterson.

Some assertions in the piece deserved the ridicule. But Weiss accurately captured a genuine perception among the people she is writing about (and, perhaps, for). They do feel isolated and marginalized, and with some justification. However, the reasons are quite different from those suggested by Weiss. She asserts that they have been marginalized because of their willingness to take on all topics and their determination not to "[parrot] what's politically convenient."

The truth is rather that dark web intellectuals, like Donald Trump supporters and the online alt-right, have experienced a sharp decline in their relative status over time. This is leading them to frustration and resentment.

[janrinok] And another contribution from Ari reviews Amanda Marcotte's new book:

Birth of a "Troll Nation": Amanda Marcotte on How and Why Conservatives Embraced the Dark Side

Interview at Salon with author Amanda Marcotte:

I had no role in editing Amanda Marcotte's new book, which bears the amusing and highly appropriate title, "Troll Nation: How the Right Became Trump-Worshipping Monsters Set on Rat-F*cking Liberals, America, and Truth Itself." None of it previously appeared in Salon, to be clear;

But "Troll Nation" is not about the election of Donald Trump. Amanda and I have certain areas of cheerfully-expressed political disagreement, but I think we share the view that Trump was the culmination of a long process, or is the most visible symptom of a widespread infection. Amanda's analysis is, as always, calm, sharp-witted and clearly focused on available evidence. American conservatives, she says, used to make rational arguments and used to present a positive social vision. Did those arguments make sense, in the end? Did that "Morning in America" vision of the Reagan years conceal a vibrant undercurrent of bigotry?

[...] How we got from the supercilious, upper-crust conservatism of William F. Buckley Jr., the dictionary definition of an elitist -- the dude could read and write Latin, for God's sake -- to the delusional ignorance of Alex Jones and #Pizzagate, the small-minded hatred of Charlottesville and the unquenchable thirst for "liberal tears" is one of the darkest mysteries of our time. It's also the story of "Troll Nation."


Original Submission #1Original Submission #2Original Submission #3

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Whoever on Sunday May 13 2018, @05:05AM (26 children)

    by Whoever (4524) on Sunday May 13 2018, @05:05AM (#679080) Journal

    Take the example of scientists who argue or discuss evolution with dyed-in-the-wool creationists. It's completely pointless.

    It's become clear since the election of Trump that there are many people like those creationists, but on political topics (actually, I would expect that most creationists would be Trump supporters): there is no point arguing with them because they feel that their ignorance deserves equal weight as verifiable facts.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @06:10AM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @06:10AM (#679106)

    There’s no need to be antisemetic.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @06:27AM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @06:27AM (#679108)

      I can't tell if you're joking...

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @08:32PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @08:32PM (#679299)

        No, he's just being anti-semantic. Which is what some of the Fine Articles are about.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @07:00AM (5 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @07:00AM (#679111)

    Take the example of scientists who argue or discuss evolution with dyed-in-the-wool creationists. It's completely pointless.

    The same thing with Trumsters and ISILs and other extremists. So what do we do with them? If you leave them alone, they'll just fuck up the world.

    The greatest enemy of the world are all the extremists. How do you know you are an extremist? If you think the world is against you, then you are part of the problem. Reality is the world is not against you - it mostly doesn't give a shit about you.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Captival on Sunday May 13 2018, @05:22PM (4 children)

      by Captival (6866) on Sunday May 13 2018, @05:22PM (#679233)

      Stock market: great
      Unemployment: great
      US Manufacturing: great
      NK/SK relations: great

      "The entire world will be destroyed" is leftist dog whistle for "them stupid minorities might realize they don't need us Democrats to lie and pretend to be helping them". Which is exactly why they came down on Kanye West so hard, to the point of threatening to kill him, all for the crime of disagreeing with them.

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Bobs on Sunday May 13 2018, @05:46PM (3 children)

        by Bobs (1462) on Sunday May 13 2018, @05:46PM (#679237)

        And how much of this is was caused by vs. in spite of, Trump's actions?

        Frankly, there is a lot of inertia, and he hasn't almost nothing in terms of legislation.

        Basically, so this is basically the economy he inherited, except for a massive tax cut to corporations a few months ago.

        Basically, if Clinton had won most of the economic issues would be similar so far, except Congress would be investigating Clinton, vs. Mueller investigating Trump.

        • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday May 13 2018, @06:51PM

          "Almost nothing in terms of legislation" is what a lot of us want from a President. I'd be tickled pink if the next four years were spent doing nothing but repealing laws but just passing no new ones would put the office holder down as second best President ever in my book.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
        • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @07:58PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @07:58PM (#679278)

          Federal regulations have the force of law. Congress essentially hands over a big chunk of their power to the administrative branch.

          Trump has ripped out a stunning amount of regulation. His promise was 2 removed for every one added, but last I heard the ratio was around 20 or 30 removed for every one added.

          For business, this is huge.

          Trump also has a major impact on tariffs.

        • (Score: 2) by VLM on Sunday May 13 2018, @10:41PM

          by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Sunday May 13 2018, @10:41PM (#679337)

          So simultaneously Trump has total control and will "fuck up the world." despite everything going freakin' great. while he also has zero influence especially over contemporary international negotiations, for example. Its a religious belief on the level of the triune god, although in this case the unshakable faith is peculiar eastern dualism ying-yang style where everything bad will be due to Trump and everything good is merely Obama inertia. Its interesting as a religious belief but not a useful model to describe or predict the real world.

          There's a mildly interesting Christian heretical doctrine of the god of the old testament, ye olde volcanoe god, also happens to be Satan at the same time. It was most popular about 1900 years ago and has varied over time. Much like the Trump thing, its theologically interesting in an academic sense but kinda weak at explaining, modeling,and predicting the real world.

  • (Score: 3, Informative) by choose another one on Sunday May 13 2018, @10:49AM (2 children)

    by choose another one (515) Subscriber Badge on Sunday May 13 2018, @10:49AM (#679150)

    > Take the example of scientists who argue or discuss evolution with dyed-in-the-wool creationists. It's completely pointless.

    Disagree. I have debated evolution, more than once, with more than one full on young-earth creationist - two of them were colleagues (both very good technical people) and friends.

    Always perfectly reasonable debates and even if no one changed their minds as a result, both sides learned from those debates. Even if what is learned is just how/why the other person thinks what they do, that is something worth knowing - particularly if the person is someone you work with.

    None of the religious folk ever tried to shut down my argument or say that I was not qualified to speak simply because I was an atheist.

    With social justice extremists on the other hand there is far less point in starting a debate (if I am even allowed to enter into one) because I can be disqualified (by the other side) at any time due to being cis-white-male.

    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @06:40PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @06:40PM (#679244)

      With social justice extremists on the other hand there is far less point in starting a debate (if I am even allowed to enter into one) because I can be disqualified (by the other side) at any time due to being cis-white-male.

      This is the truth. If you're trans-white-female, you'll get shut down as well, because all your problems apparently come from the nebulous Emmanuel Goldstein called TERFs. Or if you directly contradict them with your lived experiences as an attractive woman (7/10 territory, soon to be 8/10 with infiltrator sheath upgrades), your argument is just automatically invalid because reasons. And if you're a heterosexual trans-white-female (attracted to men), you're also an incel because you haven't found a good reason to attempt to get a cisfemale you're not attracted to into bed.

      The word incel was when I knew rational discussion was over. Incels suffer from internalized misandry. Many might be homosexual men. Look at how vicious SJWs are towards homosexuals. Homosexuals got gay marriage, and intersectional identity politics said "Fuck you! You've got yours! Not happy? Fuck you. I've got mine!" If the SJWs wanted to have fewer incels in the world, they would stop trying to turn incels into women and start trying to help them find their inner Iron John. For the homosexuals, they would help them with self-acceptance. No, instead they inflame the internalized misandry and slam them back into a straight jacket, castrated gender role as nothing but an expendable sexual object.

    • (Score: 2) by VLM on Sunday May 13 2018, @10:49PM

      by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Sunday May 13 2018, @10:49PM (#679341)

      None of the religious folk ever tried to shut down my argument or say that I was not qualified to speak simply because I was an atheist.

      Because you're not in their group. For reasons beyond the scale of this post, I attend Catholic mass occasionally with extended family members, and one peculiar shared experience is reciting the Profession of Faith toward the end of the Liturgy of the Word section. If you're a Catholic you know thats just something you go along to get along and we do it together and its meaning does not extend much beyond waving cig lighters at concert, why the hell do people do that anyway? So having a rational discussion about theology with "the other" on the topic of what it all may or may not mean is not confrontational.

      With social justice extremists on the other hand there is far less point in starting a debate (if I am even allowed to enter into one) because I can be disqualified (by the other side) at any time due to being cis-white-male.

      You're a member of our weird civilization scale suicide cult by virtue of race or gender or education or whatever, how dare you not follow membership rules?

      Its the difference between talking to "other" about some not terribly interesting or exciting old tradition that usually means very little to most individuals other than "we done it that way for 2000 years, thats why we do it that way", vs sort of a "war of northern aggression" on people trying to escape the suicide cult, you're not allowed to secede from the cult we'd rather destroy you than let you leave like an insane murderous spouse. Thats pretty much how the New Right sees the Left.

  • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday May 13 2018, @11:05AM (13 children)

    You do realize you just advocated against rational discussion as a means to resolve disagreements between people. Are you aware that when you do that, all that is left is violence? And you think your side is the civilized one? Interesting...

    --
    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @02:54PM (10 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @02:54PM (#679194)

      Reading comprehension, can you dig it????

      • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday May 13 2018, @03:30PM (6 children)

        ...there is no point arguing with them because...

        What part of that escapes you as being against reasoned debate? He has pre-judged (You know that's the literal definition of prejudice, yes?) all who disagree with him as having nothing of value to say and refused reasoned debate as a solution. The only thing left when you take away solving things with words is solving them with violence.

        --
        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @04:26PM (5 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @04:26PM (#679220)

          No. You could also ignore them.

          • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday May 13 2018, @06:52PM (4 children)

            Yeah? I see how well everyone's managing that with Trump. Got any bridges you want to sell me?

            --
            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @07:51PM (3 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @07:51PM (#679274)

              It is simply impossible for you to back down from your own absolutist statements. You made a "logical" step from "no point in having a discussion with some people" to "we must kill each other then!"

              I presume you're just triggered by the OPs singling out of Trump supporters, but there are liberals who it is pointless to have discussions with as well. Now I won't go so far as to say the discussions are completely pointless, at the very least you expose someone to different ideas so it is harder for them to say "only demon spawn believe such things!"

              So I don't have a bridge for you, but I am having a special on crow meat.

              • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday May 13 2018, @08:05PM (1 child)

                Do you have any way except violence or reasoned discourse to solve a conflict? I'd be interested to hear it. Just ignore them is not an option when two sides have diametrically opposed views of how the world should be. It's just a postponement of the conflict not a resolution.

                --
                My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday May 14 2018, @06:47AM

                  by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 14 2018, @06:47AM (#679450) Journal

                  Do you have any way except violence or reasoned discourse to solve a conflict?

                  How about not engaging in a conflict in a first place?
                  Yeah, I know, utopic... as utopic as resolving a conflict by "reasoned discourse" when the conflict was started, is based and is further fueled by emotions.

                  --
                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
              • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday May 20 2018, @03:35AM

                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday May 20 2018, @03:35AM (#681762) Journal

                It is simply impossible for you to back down from your own absolutist statements.

                Why would he need to or should do so? Maybe you ought to provide a compelling reason to back your feelings?

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @03:37PM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @03:37PM (#679207)

        Reading comprehension, can you dig it????

        It's sad when you see senility settling in. I expect there are a lot of 1960's and 1970's flower children now losing their faculties as a result from all the drugs though.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @07:47PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @07:47PM (#679269)

          It is even more sad to see a moron nitpick some slang and apply incredibly stupid judgments based on their own preconceptions. Can you grok that shit? Should I create a meme to make you more comfortable? Or maybe I'll just open a textbook and watch you run away screaming.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @09:21PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 13 2018, @09:21PM (#679314)

            Run away from a textbook? If you're going to mock someone, at least mock the positions they hold. Do you always trust information that comes in the format of a textbook? Remember that what goes into textbooks is determined by religious reactionaries in Texas. That couldn't possibly create a problem with trusting everything any given "textbook" says, could it?

            My favorite part of you SJWs being used by imperialist neoliberal capitalist elites trying to start World War 3 is how you demonstrate, in nearly every post (especially you, if you're who I think you are), that any discussion with you is pointless.

            You are a brownshirt.

    • (Score: 0, Troll) by arcz on Sunday May 13 2018, @07:51PM (1 child)

      by arcz (4501) on Sunday May 13 2018, @07:51PM (#679275) Journal

      The way things are going, violence is probably the only option to defend against SJW takeover.

      I for one, wont tolerate the racist and sexist actions of the left or right, including by "SJWs". While I have respect for free speech, actually doing these things is intolerable. Regardless of whether these actions are approved by our morally corrupt courts, they are wrong and immoral. If things continue to get worse, the time will come where I would personally take up arms. Civil war isn't very far away at this point.

      I wont accept democracy as an excuse for racist and sexist discrimination. If nessecary, I would shoot to kill the offenders. Hopefully we make a u-turn soon and that never has to happen.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 14 2018, @08:40PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 14 2018, @08:40PM (#679769)

        Good luck getting into law school, little arcz, when they link posts like this to you!