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: 3, Funny) by takyon on Sunday May 13 2018, @01:47PM (4 children)

    by takyon (881) <takyonNO@SPAMsoylentnews.org> on Sunday May 13 2018, @01:47PM (#679178) Journal

    It's how you three aristarchus.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Funny=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Funny' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 3, Funny) by aristarchus on Sunday May 13 2018, @07:26PM (3 children)

    by aristarchus (2645) on Sunday May 13 2018, @07:26PM (#679261) Journal

    Exactly! Bundling with unrelated (more or less) articles, so as to dilute the full aristarchus, and then providing a lengthy trigger-warning for alt-right types and seeking to create a safe space for them, would seem to be an attempt to mitigate the force of the critique. With predictable results. So, again, thanks for trying to three aristarchus!

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by janrinok on Monday May 14 2018, @06:14AM (2 children)

      by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 14 2018, @06:14AM (#679444) Journal

      Bundling with unrelated (more or less) articles

      But they are clearly not unrelated. The first 2 articles are just different views on the same story. The third article is yet another observation - this time from a different source - of the same phenomenon. Articles 2 and 3 with both submitted by yourself and, looking at your posting record, you only post about one topic. So there is clearly another link there.

      The reason for the 'trigger warning' - which is no such thing - is that this site tries to promote intelligent discussion. I respectfully asked that those who are not interested in the topic to please let others have such a discussion without it turning into the usual mud slinging pointless insults that we often get with such topics.

      providing a lengthy trigger-warning for alt-right

      You are letting your own bias view what you read. I intentionally made the warning all inclusive by not specifying one side or the other alone, and I quote "(alt-right or left-wing)", And it was not a request for those people to stay away but rather a warning for those who are not interested in the subject matter regarding what was to follow. The problem with your submissions is that they are always one-sided. You never try to see the problem for someone else's viewpoint. The 2nd submission, from which you quoted, left out the all important part that we need to have intelligent discussion and not just keep regurgitating the same old biased claptrap which results in an environment of hatred.

      If your previous comment was intended to claim that all your submissions should be discussed in isolation in order to prevent the 'dilution of the full aristarchus' then you need to bring a bit of reality to your life, You are but one member of this community. Your submissions get viewed exactly the same as any other submission and treated on their merit alone. Where we get related stories the editors will merge them (as we have done here) and where we receive the same story repeatedly then they will get rejected. This site was created to concentrate on topics of a specific interest, namely STEM. Politics has been added relatively recently because there is a genuine link between some political stories and our main interests. It is NOT here to be the vehicle for your own political views. You might have more success offering your submissions to a site that is interested in the same things that you are or, if such a site does not exist, then you may use the REHASH code base with our blessing to create your own site.

      Aristarchus, you are not a special snowflake in this community. We accept your foibles and imaginary persona but, at the end of the day, you alone do not dictate what we will publish or how we will treat your submissions. You are welcome to publish them all on your journal but any submissions for the front page will be treated like any other that we receive. If you wish to improve your acceptance rate, try submitting something other than politics and, preferably, on a subject more closely aligned with our community's interests.

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by aristarchus on Monday May 14 2018, @10:06AM (1 child)

        by aristarchus (2645) on Monday May 14 2018, @10:06AM (#679504) Journal

        Perish the thought!

        Aristarchus, you are not a special snowflake in this community. We accept your foibles and imaginary persona but, at the end of the day, you alone do not dictate what we will publish or how we will treat your submissions.

        I never imagined such a thing! I just wanted to counter the right-wing censorship suggested by TMB and a certain not-to-be-named editor regarding the alt-right. If such a ban were to be lifted, and aristarchus was freed, I would probably stop submitting nothing but, and go back to what I used to do, before the censorship incident. You are not getting it at all, janrinok! Again, I appreciate your honest attempts to understand, and diligent effort to rectify, but since you fail at the first, the second is failing badly.

        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by janrinok on Monday May 14 2018, @10:58AM

          by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 14 2018, @10:58AM (#679518) Journal

          In which case I say:

          #freearistarchus - for God's sake somebody give him Dobby's sock!