Quite a few of the people who take part in the discussions on this board, on both the Left and Right, are not ideologues. That is, they've thought about their political beliefs, and don't just hold them as simple reflections of the thinking of their social group. So I thought they/(you who are reading this?) might be interested in this assessment of the "Intellectual Dark Web" by Michael Shermer, of The Skeptic magazine. (He uses the term "Intellectual Dark Web", but it's not to be confused with the general use of the term "Dark Web") In case the term "Intellectual Dark Web" is not familiar, Wikipedia's take on the "Intellectual Dark Web" is here. The Wiki entry seems fair to me, and it contains links to a number of articles from across the political spectrum about the IDW. Their main critique of the term seems to be that non-PC-conforming thinkers in the US today do not face suppression, of the sort they would have faced in Hitler's Germany or Stalin's Russia (or do face today in Cuba, China, or Iran). This is a fair point. As America descends into the darkness, the proper analogy is not to fascism or communism, but to the McCarthy period in the US during the 1950s. It's not a perfect analogy -- the CPUSA did face serious legal persecution -- some of its leaders were sent to prison, and was even officially outlawed (the latter an achievement of the most leftwing Democratic Senator of the time, Hubert Humphrey). But the CP continued to publish its newspaper, and to have marches and rallies and public meetings, even while its supporters were being driven from the campuses, and its members faced job loss, and personal harrassment like being telephoned round the clock every fifteen minutes by rightwing-organized phone trees, expelled from the PTA, etc. (All of the latter happened to the parents of friends of mine.) Anyway, I recommend Quillette. Probably a lot of people who take part in discussions here would enjoy it. Find it here.
While the link to Wiki's definition of the IDW did not work it was easy enough to google. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_dark_web IDW sounds like a group of extremist rightwingers who can't agree on what to call themselves because extremist rightwingers makes them uncomfortable even though it is probably the most accurate description of them. The ORIGINS of the IDW (AKA extremist rightwingers) are a REACTION to the natural process of our society becoming ever more liberal and the extinction of what was once Genuine Conservatism that tried to preserve what was best about the past while still understanding that it is liberal progress that has made America a great nation. Which brings us back to the OP and the use of the term ideologues. I agree that there are some on the right who have thought through their positions and whenever I encounter them I find them to be respectful and insightful and capable of engaging in civil discourse. They are NOT extremist rightwingers by any stretch of the imagination even if they still support the BLOTUS although most of them do NOT. They are who I classify as the GENUINE conservatives and it is a pity that they are so few and far between. They oppose most of the positions of the left but in a manner that eschews the trolling that epitomizes the extremist rightwingers. When engaged in a discussion it is always possible to find an area of compromise with these genuine conservatives which is impossible with the extremist rightwingers. So the dilemma the IDW has is to separate the sheep from the goats. They want to be genuine conservatives but lack the fortitude to tell the extremist rightwingers that they are wrong and that they do not represent conservatism. And that means that they will continue to perceived as one and the same as evidenced by the various descriptions in Wikipedia. Without a clear and distinct separation the IDW is going to seen as just another aspect of the extremist rightwing.
Whoa, should have checked that link. Here's a fix. It's actually very funny to see the people who contribute to Quillette called "extremist right wingers". It just shows what happens to someone who becomes a helpless captive of his own ideology and is unable to see the world in any other way than his ideology permits. This sort of personality is usually to be found, in the US, in Christian fundamentalist sects. Everything is seen as a manifestation of God's Will, or of Satan's influence. (I once went to a religious meeting where one of the participants said that Satan had destroyed the ball-joint mechanism of his steering wheel, and he was serious.) Anyway, for the non-fundamentalists, do read Shermer's article and do look at Quillette.
Thank you for establishing that there is indeed a BLOTUS cult of personality that dare not be questioned even by those who want to disassociate themselves from it and thereby find themselves part of it.
And thank you for establishing there is an alt-leftie cult affected by TDS that refuses to accept the fact Trump was elected in 2016 and they will drag their feet resisting his every move and anyone who agrees with anything Trump is their mortal enemy.
Sony who controls the infrastructure of internet service doesn't take kindly to the use of the Dark Web what with all the misfits that hang there using other people identity to hack people accounts online and with game consoles that surf da web...
If one looks at politics, and considers that the majority of one side, does see the world through the lense of God's will and Satan's influence, then that one side is easier to understand. Why facts don't matter. Don't forget, plenty a Protestant preachers have, as part of their repertoire, condemnation of liberals and the liberal way of thinking. They also like to bash Catholics, Lutherans, Jews, Muslims, and Eastern religions.
This is so funny. The Trump Derangement Syndrome is that condition that leads to people developing an unbreakable bond for Trump. Unwavering support, no matter how awful the things he says and does, no matter how much he lies. No matter how much he says hateful things, or stupid things. No matter how corrupt and criminal he repeatedly shows himself to be.
Except that it is not actually a derangement because the term equates to insanity which is why the term cult is more appropriate IMO. Cults are defined unquestioning loyalty to the leader and there is no question that the BLOTUS DEMANDS loyalty to himself above all else. Another defining characteristic of a cult is opposing any form of critical thinking and that is where the distinction between the extremist rightwing and those who want to separate themselves as the IDW. However putting that distinction into practice means VIOLATING one of the founding principles of the GOP which is that one is never allowed to voice criticisms of fellow members of the party as was stipulated by St Reagan. This leaves the IDW in the uncomfortable situation of having to be associated with the extremist rightwing even though they have nothing in common other than sharing the same end of the political spectrum.
I grew up in a strict conservative Christian home. As a result, I became very active in various atheist groups, even sitting on the boards of a few, and published an atheist news letter. I quit when it got old. After all atheism has the simplest of tenets, there are no gods or other such beings. In one line, all of religion is regulated to myth. Anyhow, the rise of Trump is the rise of basically Evangelicals. I noticed this when lil' Bush was elected. There was a lot of pandering to that segment of the population. The same group was evident in the tea party crowd, as well as the global-warming-is-a-hoax crowd. And they are there, front and center at Trump rallies. What sticks out, in my mind, is how similar their tactics and argumentive styles are basically the same, regardless of if it is a religious question, or a political one. They are intermixed. The deceptive and tortured arguments they used in efforts to force religion into public schools are the same types of deceptive and tortured arguments they use to defend Trump. And in nice lock step fashion. What you and I see as deceptive and tortured arguments, they see as sound, without question. Many see the looming impeachment of Trump, in much the way as they see the crucifixion of Jesus. Or at least the beheading of John. All of the evidence, all of the eyewitness testimony, all of the smoking guns will not deter them, as he represents them, he speaks for them. He gives them what they want, and a good economy is not what they desire most.
The infrastructure of the internet is the phone and cable companies. It is their lines that the internet uses. It has to share it with phones and other networks you may not know about.
Sony is the internet God of service to the millions in the US and will decide to ban people for life for acts they did not perpetrate, been there done that...
The concept of the "dark web" is inane for those who understand the infrastructure of both the hardware and the software. It is all just a standardized protocol for sharing data that doesn't care what the content of the data might be since it really only requires to the routing codes in order to function. It is the motivation of those that use the internet that can be considered to be either legitimate or illegitimate. The hackers who exploit the system are on the illegal side while the general public are making legal use of the connectivity itself. That is not to say that there are not spammers, scammer, shysters and trolls but that they are not interacting with the web in an illegal manner, only with other users of the internet. So there is no "dark web" but rather just those who share their dark thoughts with others via the internet. They are using a grandiose term for what in the past was known as the disgruntled and self disenfranchised because they refuse to participate and interact in a normal manner. To be perfectly frank a great deal of these "dark thoughts" are indistinguishable from conspiracy theories such as the imaginary "deep state" that has the extremist rightwingers in a perpetual state of agitation these days.
When you have a credit monitoring service that service will notify when someone using your account that has been compromised on your credit report...
My first professional job was with the phone company, before the breakup. They had long been breaking up voice into little digitized packets and multiplexing them with other packets, allowing them to send many voice signals over a single line. The internet, at its most basic level, just adds packets to the stream, as the lines can't tell the difference between data and voice. It is all just 1s and 0s. It is still possible to have a hidden network over the phone lines. But that is more like a conference call than the internet. And, of course the phone company and law enforcement could still listen in. Anyhow, I get the feeling that most of what is called the dark web is just password protected sites. But with attitude.
In some ways, the idea of "going dark" comes across as intellectual cowardice. Why do they have to go around the corner to have their conversations? Of course, the number of troll responses in mainstream sites does make going to the dark side appealing. And if having a different opinion jeopardizes your employment, it may be the better alternative. I haven't checked any of those sites out yet, but I will. We've all witnessed this evolution of the web and how it's dramatically changed the way we think. The one thing we should all take away from it is the fact that much of this cultural split, or tribalism as some call it, is a direct result of that rise of the web. IMO, this means that the individual is responsible for our problems and for responsible for overcoming the tendency to split into groups that think the same. It's probably safe to say that our personalities are in part a product of genetics, and in that sense, our thoughts and beliefs can also stem from those core genetics. Give someone a test of personality traits, and we can probably tell what that person's political leanings are. Once we have an idea of those leanings, we can easily influence the person with a barrage of click-bait and charged language and lure him/her off to a place of dopamine bliss. The point is that we're flawed and we refuse to accept that. We refuse to accept that we don't know it all. We refuse to admit we might be wrong and will get hostile and even violent rather than be logical and civilized.
It's a bit discouraging to see my thread go off onto the usual Left vs Right, "we're so great, you're so bad" path. Discouraging, but not unexpected, and the discouragement about the thread is NOTHING compared to the discouragement felt on seeing the evening news over the last few days, and what Mr Trump has done. What a tragedy. Probably no one could have saved the United States, but this grotesque man is making sure that its disintegration will be especially gaudy, and horrible. Never mind! I once again comment Michael Shermer's article on the 'Intellectual Dark Web': https://www.skeptic.com/reading_roo...tudy-shedding-light-on-intellectual-dark-web/ We are in need of intelligent, clear, bold thinkers, not imprisoned in the usual categories of Left and Right, even if they occupy a place in one or the other camp. I commend this article ... and then the Quillette website itself [ https://quillette.com/ ].. especially to those who, like me, think of themselves as conservatives: many of the contributors to Quillette are from the Left side of the barricades, but they are well worth reading. But all of the contributors are of high quality in my opinion. (It's a paradox: the United States has some of the best intellectuals in the world, on the one hand, and very mediocre political class on the other. It's reminiscent of the Tsar's Russia or the Kaiser's Germany in that respect: both countries had some very fine top-class artists and scientists and mathematicians, and inadequate dim-wits on the thrones.)
