Skip to main content

The Intellectual Dark Web

The "dark web" typically invokes discussion around Tor and .onion sites, and perhaps Ross Ulbricht and his libertarian politics enter the discussion. In its most recent permutation, the dark web has become intellectual and is far less hidden from view than Silk Road and its ilk. Coined by the mathematician and financier Eric Weinstein, the term intellectual dark web (or IDW) has its base in challenging conventional modes of thought of today, much like Galileo or Martin Luther challenged convention in their day.

Even the briefest of forays into current events shows there are plenty of views being challenged every day; we are living in deeply divided times. It seems as if the IDW was borne out of frustration with the lack of progress on this front. We are wrapped up in hyper-partisanship and raw anger, challenging other views only to score points for our own rather than to seek truth. At its core the IDW is a rejection of political correctness. However, merely being contrarian would not give this movement relevance. So the question remains, what are their core beliefs? Here is what they have stated on their website:

  • Willingness to engage in conversations with people who have different beliefs and political viewpoints
  • Rejection of identity politics (and a recognition that it has become the dominant ideology in mainstream media discourse)
  • Creation of and discourse with ideas worth listening to and engaging with
  • Honoring freedom of speech
  • Other people who don’t want the IDW to speak their truth and try to silence them

Among their ranks are many prominent public figures, and I have found the best way to follow along is via Twitter. Specific personalities that I enjoy are Candace Owens (@RealCandaceO), Christina Sommers (@CHSommers), Noam Chomsky (@noamchomskyT), Kanye West (@kanyewest), and Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro).

The IDW is not cloaked from view nor does it require special software for access. All you need is the ability to question your own beliefs and a willingness to challenge yourself. The IDW is not really a new phenomenon, it just feels new in the present era whereby the ideologues coerce us into polemic thought. IDW is a rejection of polemics and an embrace of fully open discourse. Be warned, they say, this will challenge your relationships. Be prepared to lose friends.

Controversy for the sake of controversy is not constructive, and IDW is aware of this. The IDW is more likely to challenge multiculturalism on legitimate points, for example, like perhaps an underlying cruelty rather than engage in ad-hominem. Long ago, there was a controversial book called The Bell Curve that posited certain races (whites) were simply naturally smarter than others. This is not constructive discourse and would not likely be welcomed, especially since its science was long ago completely discredited.

A modern example of a miss would probably be Milo Yiannopoulos. Milo is a young gay man who is fiercely right-wing, but the nature of his discussions often veer into theatrics. I've found his thoughts more sensationalist and less intellectual. Rhode Island governor Gina Raimondo was recently profiled in the New York Times and based on that, I think she is well qualified for the IDW by simply being a moderate democrat. The young black conservative movement headed by Candice Owens is probably the clearest example of what the IDW stands for and her Blexit movement a clear example of its collective aspirations.

In my standing with the IDW I no longer feel intellectually homeless. I have already lost one friend and my family has also grown more distant as a result. These are the prices you must pay, but I am no longer an ideological slave. The cost of freedom is high but always worth it.

--Jay E. blogging for


Popular posts from this blog

The Growing Disruption Of Artificial Intelligence

Photo by Frank Wang Artificial intelligence may be as disruptive as the computers used to create it once were, and it could be even bigger. Given the disruption that social media has proven to be, one has to wonder if we are fully prepared for the life altering consequences we are building for ourselves. IBM has been a key player in the artificial intelligence arena for over two decades. Deep Blue was their first tour de force in 1997, when its team of developers received $100,000 for defeating chess champion Gary Kasparov in a game of chess. That watershed moment has its roots all the way back in 1981 when researchers at Bell Labs developed a machine that achieved Master status in chess, for which they were awarded $5000. In 1988, researchers at Carnegie Melon University were awarded $10,000 for creating a machine that achieved international master status at chess. Deep Blue, however, was the first machine to beat the world chess champion. Google has entered the fray as well,

Operator Overload

Photo by Oliver Sjostrom Life has changed dramatically since the start of the personal computer revolution in the late 1970s. We have seen computing go from the realm of military to industry, then to the home and now to the pocket of our pants. Connected computers have followed the same path, as the Internet has forever changed the landscape of computing, including how people interact with it. Along the way, we've seen computing go from being rather anti-social to being a completely mainstream component of popular culture. Let's pause for a moment and examine how technology migrated into being chic. In the late 1970s there was a lot of optimism around what computing technology could someday do for us and while many people were eager to learn, that number was still small. Computers were essentially souped up calculators and most people weren't eager to learn an arcane programming language or spend their free time noodling around with calculations. One pivotal use ca

Workplace Privacy

Photo by Philipp Birmes Americans who believe that our rights are unalienable would be surprised to learn how limited in scope they are at their place of employment. At work, our liberties are second to the need for business to monitor their assets, including their greatest asset, their people. While it is not unreasonable for businesses to be secure, they must tread carefully to avoid violating the rights of their employees. The story of Theranos, the now defunct blood testing company which has since been revealed to be a total fraud, is not new, but many new details are now emerging. Theranos was a silicon valley wunderkind because it was poised to revolutionize the blood testing industry under the leadership of its charismatic leader, Elizabeth Holmes. Holmes made many unethical business decisions, but how was this massive fraud initially discovered? One detail about Theranos that has recently emerged is how paranoid senior leadership was. Holmes had made a connection to a f