Dinner with the vanguard
Well this one sure has all the kids talking: Bari Weiss at the Times explaining the “intellectual dark web” and how courageously iconoclastic and awesome it is.
Here are some things that you will hear when you sit down to dinner with the vanguard of the Intellectual Dark Web: There are fundamental biological differences between men and women. Free speech is under siege. Identity politics is a toxic ideology that is tearing American society apart. And we’re in a dangerous place if these ideas are considered “dark.”
I was meeting with Sam Harris, a neuroscientist; Eric Weinstein, a mathematician and managing director of Thiel Capital; the commentator and comedian Dave Rubin; and their spouses in a Los Angeles restaurant to talk about how they were turned into heretics. A decade ago, they argued, when Donald Trump was still hosting “The Apprentice,” none of these observations would have been considered taboo.
But would they have been considered simplistic, meaningless, a disguise for something less anodyne, pointless, in need of further explanation? Of course they would. No shit there are “fundamental biological differences between men and women,” but what’s your point? That women are more stupid or more suited to the helping professions than to tech? When you say identity politics is a toxic ideology, what the fuck are you talking about? Free speech is under siege how and where and in what sense and how much more than it ever has been?
Or to put it another way, how about fewer clichés and more precision?
What is the I.D.W. and who is a member of it? It’s hard to explain, which is both its beauty and its danger.
Most simply, it is a collection of iconoclastic thinkers, academic renegades and media personalities who are having a rolling conversation — on podcasts, YouTube and Twitter, and in sold-out auditoriums — that sound unlike anything else happening, at least publicly, in the culture right now. Feeling largely locked out of legacy outlets, they are rapidly building their own mass media channels.
Sam Harris? I doubt that he’s “locked out of legacy outlets.” On the other hand Dave Rubin? Why should he feel welcomed to “legacy outlets” – they’re not public schools or libraries, open to all, they’re publications (I assume that’s what she means by that unattractive descriptor) that want good writers and thinkers as opposed to random people who just turn up brandishing an opinion.
The closest thing to a phone book for the I.D.W. is a sleek website that lists the dramatis personae of the network, including Mr. Harris; Mr. Weinstein and his brother and sister-in-law, the evolutionary biologists Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying; Jordan Peterson, the psychologist and best-selling author; the conservative commentators Ben Shapiro and Douglas Murray; Maajid Nawaz, the former Islamist turned anti-extremist activist; and the feminists Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Christina Hoff Sommers.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a former Islamist turned anti-extremist activist just as Maajid Nawaz is, and she’s more known for that than she is as a feminist. Sommers of course is not known as a feminist at all, but as a contemptuous critic of feminism.
The core members have little in common politically. Bret and Eric Weinstein and Ms. Heying were Bernie Sanders supporters. Mr. Harris was an outspoken Hillary voter. Ben Shapiro is an anti-Trump conservative.
But they all share three distinct qualities. First, they are willing to disagree ferociously, but talk civilly, about nearly every meaningful subject: religion, abortion, immigration, the nature of consciousness. Second, in an age in which popular feelings about the way things ought to be often override facts about the way things actually are, each is determined to resist parroting what’s politically convenient. And third, some have paid for this commitment by being purged from institutions that have become increasingly hostile to unorthodox thought — and have found receptive audiences elsewhere.
Oops. She started by saying they all share three distinct qualities, then she says that one of those three is that some have paid for this commitment by being purged – if only some have been purged then they don’t all share that one, do they. Sharpen up. This is why the “legacy outlets” are so shut-outy.
“People are starved for controversial opinions,” said Joe Rogan, an MMA color commentator and comedian who hosts one of the most popular podcasts in the country. “And they are starved for an actual conversation.”
This is the “intellectual dark web”? Intellectual?
Offline and in the real world, members of the I.D.W. are often found speaking to one another in packed venues around the globe. In July, for example, Jordan Peterson, Douglas Murray and Mr. Harris will appear together at the O2 Arena in London.
Of course they will.
“I’ve been at this for 25 years now, having done all the MSM shows, including Oprah, Charlie Rose, ‘The Colbert Report,’ Larry King — you name it,” Michael Shermer, the publisher of Skeptic magazine, told me. “The last couple of years I’ve shifted to doing shows hosted by Joe Rogan, Dave Rubin, Sam Harris and others. The I.D.W. is as powerful a media as any I’ve encountered.”
Mr. Shermer, a middle-aged science writer, now gets recognized on the street. On a recent bike ride in Santa Barbara, Calif., he passed a work crew and “the flag man stopped me and says: ‘Hey, you’re that skeptic guy, Shermer! I saw you on Dave Rubin and Joe Rogan!’” When he can’t watch the shows on YouTube, he listens to them as podcasts on the job. On breaks, he told Mr. Shermer, he takes notes.
Exciting!!!
And safer than getting women drunk and then “having sex” with them.
Editing to add: H/t Sackbut
I don’t need to go to the intellectual dark web for this – it is something that is mentioned often by my new young colleague who insists that the biology of differences (sexual differences I admit to) must mean something with all those hormonal differences bathing our brains. Convenient, since he is young, white, and male, right? And hormones change when you get older, as well as when you have female cooties? And always in that oh, so suggestive, not a bit bigoted, just saying, sort of way. I mean, think about it, will you? Must be something in all these hormones that makes us respond differently.
These guys are not offering up new controversial ideas for the radical thinker of tomorrow; they are rehashing stale old long-accepted ideas from the thinkers of yesterday that just happen to mesh with what the currently on-top group wishes to think, and the fact that others are questioning those findings using new and different findings from somewhat more radical ideas is perceived by them as “shutting them out” of the conversation. Disagreeing = shutting out in their worldview, because after all, if you are disagreeing, it is the same as saying STFU, right? No, it is saying we disagree. Let’s show you our radical new controversial evidence suggesting you may be wrong, that your stale, old fashioned, out of date, dusty views might actually be stale, old-fashioned, out of date, and dusty…and wrong.
The true controversial idea seems to be that women and minorities are people with dreams, hopes, aspirations, and abilities that match those of the current masters of the universe, who cannot seem to stand the competition.
And I agree that identity politics are toxic – because true identity politics are those that try to favor a particular group over all others, not those that claim equal rights for all groups; therefore, these so-called IDW warriors are the true practitioners of identity politics.
Hmmm, so neither especially intellectual nor ‘dark web’ at all. More another tiresome, shallow, whiny, bleat on the ordinary web. In other words, almost indistinguishable from much of the ordinary web. Except presumably the participants feel they are the true intellectuals. If they are then we need a god to help us…
So this is edgier than “thought leaders” I guess? Oh, how the “Brights” have fallen!
Are we expecting an appearance from Edwina Rogers anytime soon?
Interesting Twitter thread here where someone calls Harris out on a dubious anecdote and, indirectly, Weiss for failing to do basic reporting diligence.
You’re not really a thought leader unless you can come up with fresh new ways to call yourself a thought leader.
This new name is strikingly similar to dark enlightenment, another bullshit term used by people wanting to making a martyr of themselves and their depressingly popular views. There’s a shared element of people reacting to criticism with a kind of wounded resentment. (And I am disappointed to see Maajid on that list.)
But really, this is a bit much. Has the author never realised that media outlets have a point of view? And that they curate their content in accordance with this view? This trait is very frequently attributed to the left and solely to the left, but the people that do that are simply blind to their own preferred outlets doing the same thing. Imagine Breitbart or similar giving a paid position and column to a BLM supporting Bernie Sanders advocate.
And then there’s this eyeroll inducing contradiction.
So they’re not excluded from publicly airing their views – Harris speaks at “packed” venues, and it says right there that they are building their own mass media channels for fuck sake – but they feel that the are. Yet you can lay bets that they would attribute that ‘feeling is knowing’ trend to the left, and not to themselves.
And here was I worrying that my thought was insufficiently led.
Have you seen the photographs in that article? I can’t bring myself to believe that the photographer wasn’t taking the piss. I mean what the *fuck* is going on with Shermer in a dark shirt and tie perched halfway up a tree?
What kept going through my mind while reading the piece was this:
“Look at these brave iconoclastic fighters for conversations that we just can’t have, look at how they’re bravely having these conversations that are just not acceptable in the mainstream, look at the millions of people in their audiences watching them have these conversations that you apparently just can’t have!”
There is something off about the idea of people being shunned for their ideas, and them having massive and often influential audiences.
And they’re so brave – as if that makes them right. FFS one of the “intellectuals” seeking “truth” praised in the piece is Jordan Peterson, a guy whose definition of truth boils down to whatever is convenient to him.
The whole thing reminds me of creationism or climate change denialism, or really just conspiracy theories in general, stuff that claims “They don’t want you to know”. Sure there is fashionable nonsense – our host co-wrote a dictionary of it, but there is also unfashionable nonsense. Nonsense that was fashionable once, that has since fallen out of favour.
Who cares if it is “brave” to spout unfashionable nonsense? It is still nonsense, now its also passe.
@inklast:
Mrs latsot was unfortunate enough to undergo a year of chemo and will have to endure 10+ years of other hormone-fuckery-related drugs. It turns out she could still manage the whole running a successful law firm thing and being a lovely human being and putting up with me and Fortran and so on despite the most dramatic hormonal changes it’s possible to endure.
Strange, it didn’t seem to change her at all, other than causing her to not die.
iknklast:
That brings to mind a visit my wife and I and her cousin made to Kalgoorlie, Western Australia, while riding on the Indian Pacific train across Australia. We took the opportunity to visit the Super Pit: an enormous open-cut gold mine.
Protests over sex-discrimination may have changed now, but then these huge trucks (see links), each as big as a house, and costing gazillions to buy, run and maintain, were all driven by women. It was company policy, we were told, because too many male drivers had accidents driving them. The trucks had to be driven at a steady 4 kilometres per hour down into the pit on one road, and out again on another, with no safety fences and a 500 metre vertical depth. Fences wouldn’t be much use anyway, as each truck carries 230 tonnes of ore. (http://superpit.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/130228_PrimarySchools1.pdf) That last link is oriented to primary school kids, but is probably best of all.
Young men in monster machines have been known to get a tad adventurous, prone to skylarking and mutually competitive. That was the last thing the mine operators wanted. So those testosterone-raddled young bucks all had to be content with other, less glamorous jobs.
https://thewest.com.au/news/kalgoorlie-miner/super-pit-operator-hits-diversity-milestone-ng-b88753109z
http://www.abc.net.au/local/videos/2010/06/24/2936360.htm
https://www.cnet.com/news/take-a-tour-of-the-super-pit-the-largest-open-pit-gold-mine-in-australia/
” I can’t bring myself to believe that the photographer wasn’t taking the piss.”
Same here. Sam Harris, for example, is posed with two bushes flanking his lower half, so that he clearly looks like a penis with two bushy testicles.
“Locked out of legacy media outlets” and yet getting this hagiography in the New York Times….
@ Cholula Gosh
HA! yes.
Do the people on that list know that they’ve been put there? Steven Pinker, Alice Dreger, Hirsi Ali, Nawaz, bloody Tim Ferriss?
Ophelia would qualify, having been bounced by the trans-bully brigade…
Well that’s a good point, John. A previous thought-leading organisation claimed people who had never heard of it and who later distanced themselves from it, didn’t it.
I think the shrubbery-photograph people are probably complicit but you’re right that we should wait and see about the others.
No I don’t think they do know, or at least I don’t think they asked to be there or agreed to be there, I think it’s just a list somebody made.
And hahaha no I wouldn’t qualify, I’m not nearly notorious enough. I’m just a quiet little blogger and columnist, doing my quiet little thing. Also I wasn’t bounced, I jumped – though I would have been bounced if I hadn’t jumped.
Come to think of it though it’s surprising that Jerry Coyne isn’t on there. He’s veered more and more in the Jordan Peterson direction, but with vastly more scholarly heft than your Dave Rubins and in fact your Sam Harrises.
Then again Gad Saad made a spectacle of himself on Twitter yesterday saying he TOTALLY should have been on it because of how important he is.
#16
That’s so sad its Saad.
It iis, iisn’t it.
Michael Shermer would love us to think he’s on “the [rather arbitrary] list” because he’s some iconoclastic thinker. When really he knows, and so do we, that he’s no longer getting gigs because he’s a rapist.
Pretty good takedown by Nathan Robinson here, making many of the points noted in this thread. (Robinson also had a great piece on Jordan Petersen recently; I need to start paying more attention to this guy.)
Yeah, the photos are hilarious. Maybe they were all out looking for Raccoons or Skunks.
Looks like the photographer did manage to find some Lesser Shitweasels.
Michael Shermer could pose for an illustration of The Opposite of an Iconoclastic Thinker.
Hey, remember that time you were super polite and agreed with Dawkins about how to talk about some stuff and then Dawkins – like THREE DAYS LATER – shat the entire bed and completely forgot about what you’d both agreed?
I’m calling that notorious. It was a thing of note.
For sure, and let’s not forget that ugly episode. Great to have a loose coalition of free-thinky people. Not so fucking great when half the buggers are waving down busses the better to run people over for…free…thinking…..
Oh, Jerry. I really like his books and I love some of the writing in his books. But somehow in the past decade he turned from an old hippie like me into a cock. Or perhaps I turned into even more of an old hippie than I already was, it isn’t clear. Either way, he’s a cock now.
Hahaha yes I remember – but I think it wasn’t even three days. We posted the thing on Saturday and his blog post about “drunk women [who are drunk because the man deliberately got them drunk] can’t say they’ve been raped” was on the Monday – early on the Monday. I think it wasn’t even two full days – Saturday afternoon my time to already posted by my Monday morning.
Jerry – I know. It was like Invasion of the Body Snatchers.
Not even two days. Outstanding. The work that went into that statement and the thoughtlessness with which it was discarded,,, Un fucking believable.
Yes. It was quite startling.
@Screechy Monkey #4–
That was indeed interesting. Wow.