slug.com slug.com

32 8

LINK Is the 'Intellectual Dark Web' Politically Diverse [enough]?

Uri Harris @Quillette recently penned an interesting article [quillette.com] in which he claims that there is disconnect between the core IDW members’ policy positions (majority liberal, see [danielmiessler.com] and what he sees as biased attacks on Democrats. He cites the dual evidence of the willingness of IDW members to talk with conservatives and his perception of a conservative leaning of the fans of the IDW members.

I believe what the author is missing is that the Democratic party has fractured and that its far-Left, identity-politics, callout culture wing has taken over the narrative. To me, the IDW represents an honest, common-sense group of people who are willing to openly discuss the merits of opinions based on facts, reason and compassion.

According to the author, “The IDW needs to make a choice. Does it want to be a partisan organisation, where its members get together in front of an audience to iron out their differences and strategise on how to defeat the new left, or does it want to be genuinely non-partisan? If the latter, it needs to open itself up to new left people and ideas.”

I wrote a bit about this in the newsletter [slug.com] and just two days ago here: "A potential measure for thought diversity"

We are at a great time to discuss the movement and how to proceed. Some things we could do (or not):

  • Make the political positions of key IDW members more clear to better show its diversity.

  • Come up with a message that is tailored to the concerns and perceptions of those on the far-Left.

  • Actively seek out and promote far-Left spokespeople who bring honesty, civility, reason and compassion. (suggestions?)

What do you think?

Admin 8 Apr 17
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

32 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

10

My guess is that people on the right have gravitated here because it's one of the few places we aren't 'shouted down' or banned from posting viewpoints. The far leftists, at least the ones who do the shouting and banning, have no interest in a civil discussion. They won't be coming here, except to try and stop our conversation. Moderate leftists (and even centrists) haven't been shouted down and banned, so they aren't looking for a new place where they can discuss ideas freely.

I saw Daniel Miessler's chart, and it oddly doesn't seem to reflect the leanings of people posting on this site. From what I've seen of the member polls here, most members here identify ideologically on the right-leaning side of the spectrum, in one form or another.

You can't force a different makeup of this group - all you can do is offer a civil conversation, and see who decides to come to the table.

I don't believe you can, or should, try to pin down and advertise the political positions of key IDW members. That's their prerogative individually, not ours.

As the site grows, it will gain detractors. I believe the best defense against that is to offer a product so self-evidently useful and beneficial, that the detractors simply make themselves look foolish.

9

If IDW is to remain a platform where all members - that is ALL members regardless left or right leaning are able to state their opinions without fear of censure then there is no need to create policies or special niches for either group. I tend to think of IDW as the "free market place" of ideas. In this environment the dynamic is self correcting. That is to say that the better arguments will prevail - they will attract attention and they will spread across the socio-political landscape like good genes passed down to new generations. It possible the author of that piece is just now learning that the real world is not so "progressive" as he thought it was. What he perceives as "drowned out voices of the left" is really nothing more than evidence of the fact that dogma and doctrine of the left is not so powerful and not embraced by as many people as he believed. From what I have seen in the short time of my presence here on ID'W there is absolutely NOBODY preventing or blocking or threatening by policy nor by any other method the voices of the membership. If he has ideas (and who doesn't really) that he wants to share he can create posts just like everyone else. It seems perhaps that he is not accustomed to oppositional comments being so freely offered. Voices of common sense - voices that speak of things like fidelity to established law and order; voices that demand fiscal accountability and ask for solid evidence when they see the alarmist, hyperbolic assertions of "progressive leftists" have been squelched everywhere else. This is what makes IDW unique and what will soon enough become the most popular social media platform on earth. The author is whining. He wants admin to make all the bad people go away. He doesn't have the ability apparently to present solid support for his arguments so he wants mommy to fix it so everybody has to listen to him without talking back. Too bad. So sad. He can find that kind of structure on face book and twitter from what I understand.

thanks Guido. we need a "thanks emoticon" and we need one that says "I disagree" but doesn't go "grrr and look angry" @Guido_Provolone

Exactly iThink, couldn't have said it better,great reflection ?

These comments "offend" me! 🙂

8

Personally I don't agree with his assessment that we are deliberately exclusionary. I heard and read about report comparing the willingness of conservatives to interact with Leftists with the willingness of Leftists to work with Conservatives. The report discovered that Conservatives are more willing to talk with Leftists while Leftists are less inclined to talk with Conservatives.
I believe that many of the people on this site, including the people who started this site have found this to be true. I know that I had Left leaning people on my F.B., including a friend of many decades, who called me names, threatened to report me to the police or said that my children must be terrible people because they had a dad like me. Even in my time on this site I've been called a racist, bigot etc. All of the Leftists who were on my F.B. page have unfriended me of their own accord and my former friend is one of them.
It is wrong to think that just because we don't have Leftists opinions here or a lot of members from P.O.C. that we are indifferent or ignorant of the arguments against us. The truth is that we don't only know are positions well but we also know there's and are more than willing to talk with them but they, including the Muslims, don't want to talk to us.
I say to leave things as they are. The real issue is that the Left/Muslims alliance resents that we have figured out how to organize that doesn't depend on a leftist constituency for approval.

My experience on FB is similar to yours.

I have no problem with inviting all shades of left and right, but prefer to discuss matters with civility. One of my best friends in town is an avowed democrat; but we have great conversations and neither of us gets our undies in a wad if the other makes a good point during one.

Name calling and making character vilifying accusations have no place in any discussion group. I do not miss the leftist presence on IDW, and I would not protest it either. But I would protest childish name-calling or bullying.

My vote is to leave it as is for the nonce. Do I feel strongly about it? ...not especially.

"However, that doesn't mean liberals necessarily like all of the ideas they see. Consistent liberals were the most likely group to block or unfriend someone because they disagreed with their political postings, with 44 percent saying they had "hidden, blocked, defriended, or stopped following someone" on Facebook due to their political postings."

[washingtonpost.com]

7

Who gets to decide what the IDW is, since nobody started an organization that is the IDW that I'm aware of. Somebody coined a phrase.

The IDW consists of individuals that have something to say, and I don't think it's all political. SO, why let someone label it political and limit to some partisan crap just because they can't see anything past themselves?

I reject the idea. People have political opinions, but that doesn't in itself demand they identify as political. Who cares if there are enough leftists in IDW. They should sack up, start thinking, and start communicating something useful to the world. We don't have to hold a place for them. To be absolutely honest, if leftists think IDW is a political organization, they're not smart enough to participate anyway. Be better, or toil away with whatever it is you do. Sorry. That's annoying.

@Guido_Provolone, I think the point was more about the IDW and not about idw.community, right? No, my reaction is the same. I'm arguing the IDW is bigger than politics and even when politics is part of the conversation, it's only part of a bigger conversation. Superimposing a rigid political lens over something infinitely more meaningful is tragically reductionist, and threatens to devalue the phenomenon of IDW. it's a mistake.

6

I am apolitical in a commercial sense . I do not join , endorse or support factions . I see such organizational activity as sociopathic to some degree .

General Washington once warned about political parties, and he was right...

@SpikeTalon He (GW) was right.
...and I am right too.

6
  • Make the political positions of key IDW members more clear to better show its diversity.

Making their position more clear is, in my opinion, counter-intuitive to what some of them try to defend. That would be to put their individuality above the box that political position forces. Political postions are tricky things and turning their movment into something political is not what they had in mind. All that they want is for people to be able to speak their mind and have a discussion without being put into those poilitcal boxes to be dismissed or accepted.

  • Come up with a message that is tailored to the concerns and perceptions of those on the far-Left.

They arent a group of "activist" that want to push 1 particular mindset onto an other group of people. They talk about the "far-left" a lot but who really identifies themselves as such? They can only help people realise how some of the ideology can be dangerous when pushed far. That is the only thing they can do, they can't force people to suddenly follow what they believe in

  • Actively seek out and promote far-Left spokespeople who bring honesty, civility, reason and compassion. (suggestions?)

IDW is just a group of people who gave a name to their group. they arent an organisation and i don't think they should become one. It should be something that everyone can easily be part of.
So i don't see how promoting something beside civil discussion is important. They already have talks all around the world that is about the best thing they could do IMO.

There are possibly some honest far lefties who could be honest or civil or reasoned or compassionate, but the intersectionality of this group makes it vanishingly rare...

6

I did not come to this site seeking like minded people. I came to discuss, learn and experience, and explore other's, thoughts mind's, opinion's, ideas, views ect. On anything and everything available here. Is the site not open to all to do the same?

6

"To me, the IDW represents an honest, common-sense group of people who are willing to openly discuss the merits of opinions based on facts, reason and compassion."

This. I think we should be promoting this very idea. If any of things you mention promote this idea then I'm game, otherwise it's not necessary.

5

Most people are conservative, courteous, responsible, and inquisitive. Most people are not mindless hard-nosed leftists. The elitists in the media distort the ratio.

5

We have enough far left dominated sites why here

5

Make the political positions of key IDW members more clear to better show its diversity. NO

Come up with a message that is tailored to the concerns and perceptions of those on the far-Left.NO

Actively seek out and promote far-Left spokespeople who bring honesty, civility, reason and compassion. (suggestions?) Is there such a thing? Many of the members here have been essentially deplatformed elsewhere by the Left. Don't do them any favors--let us all abide by the same Rules.

5

The reason most here lean "right" of center is we believe in free speech no matter the consequence. I support that concept. That makes it seem that we ignore the left. Of course we don't. Diversity will naturally occur over time. This site is still new, don't press the issue, in my humble opinion anyways.

4

I strongly think no political affiliation should be necessary, IDW should be about honest and open discussions on a variety of topics minus the insults and name calling. So far this site has been fairly neutral, but in the last week or so I've noticed an increase in far-right conspiracy theories, which is concerning. Both extremes really turn me off, and if this site is to grow and become successful we need to steer clear of the dogma from both sides. How precisely we go about doing such with minimal censorship as possible, I am still meditating on.

4

As a non- American I often find your political Left and Right to be often very different from the way they are perceived here in Australia.

I would also argue that there are many who say they are on the right of politics but actually hold very left wing views about government.

We too suffer from a left that simply tries to shut down any view they don't agree with but in Australia the extreme right does the same thing. This tends to leave the centre across both major political parties in agreement.

I would see myself as very much centre right in my views.

4

A couple ideas:

  1. An IDW figure should accept a campus debate with Nathan J. Robinson.
  2. Joe Rogan should have Sam Seder on his show.
4

We don't lean right - the left has pulled very far to the left... most of us used to be the left... self included.

Don't chase after them - and for sure don't let them silence the discussion. Meet their idiocy head on with compassion and understanding and civility, and let them either change or implode.

EDIT: as a friend of mine pointed out to me the other day (and he's a pretty hard core leftist, mind you) "You aren't a centrist, you are an absolutist, and you will gladly stand your ground when you know you have the facts. The facts make something right, and you stand on that. Sometimes right, sometimes left. And you aren't afraid to admit when you are wrong or don't know"

Which is funny, because I always thought I was pretty gray about a lot of things... I see where a lot of the left comes from, even when I don't agree with them... but I also don't go out of my way to beat them up, rather approach it from, "hey, did you know about..."
Much of the IDW is along those lines - we aren't here to beat people up (physically or metaphorically) but we are here to unravel the knots and find the truth. How hard is that for most people?

4

Let everyone speak. Too much stupidity will be ignored or chewed up and spit out. Hence we can expect far fewer Liberals than infest TV, MSM, and the schools.

3

“Is the intellectual dark web politically diverse enough?”

I don’t even agree with the premise of the question, because the intellectual dark web is not politically diverse at all. It is in fact a partisan political project that supports conservative politics, while feigning interest in matters like freedom of speech and liberalism.

I am sure you will recall my thread about whether or not left-wingers are welcome on IDW. While the response was overwhelmingly in favour of more left-wing involvement, very few left wingers responded. If the IDW were truly bipartisan and concerned only with freedom of speech, then we would anticipate much larger response from the left.

Even among those who were in favour of left-wing participation, it was clear that almost no-one was prepared to engage with the left honestly or on fair terms. Many believed that the left simply wouldn’t want to participate because they don’t believe in free speech, or only wanting them to debate in order to prove them wrong. Under these conditions there is absolutely no incentive for the left to participate, so it’s little wonder most of them refuse.

The group itself is not much better. Jordan Peterson may be an academic within the field of psychology, but the work he is best known for isn’t academic at all. His ruminations on philosophy don’t make sense (eg equating post-modernism and Marxism) and his interpretations of history are factually incorrect (the Nazis did enslave Jews, contrary to Peterson’s lecture on the topic). In effect Jordan uses his degree in an unrelated field to ride the coattails of academics in sociology and history, to then claim these people aren’t credible because of their alleged political beliefs.

Dave Rubin will happily invite conservatives on to his show and give them soft pitch interviews were they won’t ever be challenged or confronted. This would perhaps be fine if he invited people who disagree with him on more often, but that virtually never happens. Probably because his show is funded by the libertarian Koch brothers, who are obviously more interested in using the show as a political project than facilitating debate.

Sargon of Akkad has proven himself a dishonest actor multiple times. He will happily produce videos disparaging people based on their appearance or making accusations about their character, but will whine when others return the favour. He alleges he claims to be left wing due to his support for benefit increases, but his contempt for social housing suggests otherwise.

Perhaps the most important part of all is that there are left wing intellectuals out there who do not fit the SJW mould. Noam Chomsky, Yanis Varoufakis, Slavoj Zizek... yet they are not courted by the allegedly “diverse” intellectual dark web.

The IDW doesn’t court these people because it would be contrary to their true purpose, which is partisan political objectives proclaiming to be neutral; while Chomsky, Zizek et al don’t court the IDW because it’s not a serious intellectual movement, it’s a group of edgy internet celebrities who have beaten the same drum for half a decade now.

@Mortaqai And yet the membership of this site is still monolithicly conservative. You can’t call yourself a diverse group if you are all similar, even if there aren’t any defined barriers for entry.

And my post was long because I wanted to provide evidence to justify my position. If I hadn’t done, I’m sure you would instead have followed up with “no evidence”

Can you point me to an exchange that illustrate the claim "it was clear that almost no-one was prepared to engage with the left honestly or on fair terms." ? I'd like to have a word with them.

The IDW is a conservative echo chamber. That should be obvious from the get go.

@InternetDorkWeb

Nobody was recruited to the Internet Dark Web. The phrase was coined to describe something that is happening in the world. A bunch of relatively disconnected people started talking. Uh Oh. Cue the chickens.

My experience of this site is it's not 'conservative'. People were drawn to this site for a variety of reasons--again, reflecting that thing that was happening in the world. Acting like someone went out and started putting this whole thing together is intellectually dishonest.

Personally, I'm pushing to NOT recruit any group. I'm advocating we recruit 'intellectuals' and let the politics fall where it may. I'd rather have smart people to talk to about all of the questions in the world than be trapped in necessarily constricted unidimensional political snark. Not interesting.

By the way, I don't consider myself conservative. I don't buy one team's platforms. I judge policies on merit. I used to agree with the left more, but the left changed. The moved, and I don't fit as well with them as I used to. I'm often opposed to what they've become. But, that's not because of who they are. It's because of the policies they've adopted and the tactics they've adopted in an attempt to rebuild the world into something I consider dangerous.

I'm just one guy, but it seems to me others that have gathered here seem to be like me in some of those positions. I don't know anyone from the site personally. It's not orchestrated. And, to be honest, I'm not in the frame of mind to apologize for it. I don't care that the left chooses not to participate. That's on them. Leaves some important holes, but I'm not going to force or beg ANYONE to come out and play. I'm content to play with mys....errr....wait.

Zizek and Peterson are doing an event soon, so your claims about him are false. It is always fun to see the leftist perspective. It is always freely available, yet always being tyrannically silenced. The only resistance the left only faces is administered by factual truth, more so than anyone's efforts. Most of the IDW is leftist. Just recently we had a community member claim that Peterson is an anti-white leftist out to destroy white men. Everyone here is allowed to speak. The IDW is characterized by its pursuit of truth and openness to discussion. There is no lack of leftist representation hear. However, leftists are cannibals and no one is leftist enough for the leftist. That's why in leftist regimes they murder each other, it is why Hillary started the birther movement and the members of the IDW are being ostracized by leftist institutions. Solzhenitsyn was a communist, most of the prisoners of the gulag were. This is why the left must recruit members from outside their own society, and the young and naive. Eventually, their smartest members learn to oppose them.

@Janeybird, sorry, you lost at 'I delve deeper for better understanding of terms/words and then come back and learn more. That's not everyday stuff. Humility is truly a great thing--maybe the best of things, but allow your curiosity to carry the weight. What would you call you? A person is fine, but it's incomplete because that intention groups you whether or not you like the label or not. Most of the people here, IN MY OPINION, are intentional learners. That sounds a whole lot like an intellectual to me. YOU'RE the person I want here. Exactly that!

Couldn't agree more.
(But you are entitled to your opinion. Why does this sound threatening? Or is it just me.?)

@Mortaqai It’s a bit ironic that you should call my post long winded and then follow up with this guff:

“All are free to speak here and learn from each other freely. No one is expected to swallow anyones opinion.

Learn, grow, share with genuine interest in learning and growing even more.

Let the truth be revealed for what it is, and speak for itself.
Let those who love the truth, learn of it. And let those who hate it, be ashamed and driven away by it.”

At least I went into detail to try to make myself clearer. And while yes it is my own opinion, that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be justified.

@Mortaqai, @cRaZyTMG Read through the responses to the left wing thread:

“Liberalism is a mental disorder.”

“Basically JFK style liberals welcome, AOC antifa type people maybe should stay away.”

“ I am worried that "reasonable" isn't typically associated with leftists, though. ?”

“Sure! let them in and post... it gives me more opportunity to see how twisted they are and to read how crazy they get when confronted with LOGIC - instead of sheer emotion. lol!”

“The left are not interested in your opinion - what they ARE interested in is hearing THEIR opinion coming out of YOUR mouth! ”

Obviously not everyone responded like this but many, many people did. If you aren’t going to engage people you disagree with fairly and honestly, there is really no point talking to them in the first place.

@EdNason All of them are, please stop trying to be cute.

@chuckpo

“Relatively disconnected”

They are not disconnected at all; they repeatedly associate with one another and share broadly similar political views. If you cannot see that it’s a political project, I can only say that you need to look a bit more critically.

@Facci
“Just recently we had a community member claim that Peterson is an anti-white leftist out to destroy white men.”

If you ask white supremacists to determine what is left and what is right on a conservative website, surprise surprise, they will call people they disagree with “left-wing”.

@InternetDorkWeb Your examples are all opinions expressed as opinions (with the possible exception of the first one because there is a defined standard for mental illness) and NONE of them demonstrate an unwillingness to discuss. The very act of posting such statements implies a willingness to discuss.That's how real debate works.

@InternetDorkWeb, when do you think all of this started? Do you think it's decades old? You're saying Ben Shapiro and Sam Harris share political views? JP himself says politics is miles downstream. The conversation is at a much higher level than politics--about much more important things that politics. In some cases, we're grappling with what it is to be human and is there somebody in charge of this? That's NOT political. Politics is a silly sideshow by a carnival barker in comparison to the existential questions facing us. Even JP's (and Zizek's) dive into psychology is more important than politics--and history and literature. Politics is like the bottom of all of this--only cited as examples of greater things. Man, if you came for the politics, I'd have to think this isn't very fulfilling for you. It's like going to the zoo and being stuck in a cellular biology lecture in an windowless amphitheater.

Its freedom of choice to join or not ,most left wingers seem to prefer defamation to debate

3

I don't know but I'm enjoying myself thank you

3

Those sound good helping to understand each other's lean to a point of view. The idea of one concern/subject posted for a time can lead visitors to stay on one conversation with more involvement. Don't want to limit, but with all new subjects being random follow up can be lost. Maybe add a specific post of one Far-Left concern on occasion challenging input to hold conversation for ideas.

3

IDWs come together in mutual dislike of ideologues.
And we like to make fun of them. And their stupid faces. 'Cause it's funny.

2

I gave everybody a 'Like' for participating. If some of you got two it was accidental I assure you! Seriously tho' I think it would be a mistake and quite frankly take a minor miracle to pigeon hole this group. My own biases have been challenged, my views heard, and most of all I am learning, even from those with whom I might disagree. This is a grand experiment, and maybe other than emphasizing the MOSTLY civil dicussions part, for the easily triggered, would let it run its course.

2

If you go to FB and look at the comments on the ad for IDW anyone with a half a brain can see that with people like ben Shapiro ect. That your not going to attract some people was this by design? Again that is not why i came, i am a explorer always have been wanted to be a archaeologist as a kid. But some people need more. In the comments most are making fun of the people used to promote the site and not thinking that they could meet new people learn ect.

2

Maybe it'd be nice to have Zizek in the IDW.
We'll see how it goes tomorrow but I really think that it could be interesting to add a bit of "leftism" to the group while keeping the IDW spirit.

1

Im new here,, can't we stay as we are for a little while???

As long as possible😂

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:31553
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.