Crucially, the entire political axis on which traditional media still operates is shown on the intellectual dark web to be moribund. — Douglas Murray.

 

 

In the media

How to join the Intellectual Dark Web — a user’s guide — David Fuller

Inside the intellectual dark web — Douglas Murray

What is driving the rise of the ‘Intellectual Dark Web?’ — Jacob Kishere

 

Is this an alt-right website?

No. The people listed on this website have a diverse range of political positions, left, centre and right on the traditional spectrum. That is probably the least interesting thing about them. Where they begin to converge are on issues of the individual vs collectivism, liberty over authoritarianism, and the importance of freedom of speech. If you pay attention, they have a lot more to share as well.

If “alt-right” was your initial thought, you may be suffering from Ostrich Parasitic Syndrome or captured by a political ideology. You might also live in a mythical place called the left pole where any opinion that doesn’t conform to your orthodoxy is considered far-right. The exact same applies in the opposite direction. Check yourself.

Journalists and others who label freethinkers as alt-right nazis are confused or dishonest. Either way, they are worth calling out or avoiding.

In fact, the author of this site is left of centre with mostly progressive, liberal values but considers all views.

 

Who made this?

I might choose to share that later. It’s hardly important. I have no affiliation with any of the people listed on this site, old media, new media or any political movement. I’m just a person who is trying to tell the truth. Talk to me @edustentialist.

 

Why did you make this?

I wanted there to be a place where people who are looking for real discussions could be directed to start their journey. The traditional media is only offering soundbites, conformity and ideologies. There is very little room for partisanship or truth between warring factions.

Eric Weinstein’s intellectual dark web seemed as good a category as any to build this website around. Plus, he did ask.

 

Why is X on this site?

They are part of a discussion that is happening online. They are part of the new media and not the old. Many of them have taken an honest stand, been burnt by the orthodoxy, and found people in the new media that are ready to listen, discuss and debate ideas. Although they may disagree on many things, there are certain convictions that they seem to hold in common:

  • A willingness to engage in conversations with people who have different beliefs and political viewpoints
  • Ideas worth listening to
  • Rationality over feels
  • Honoring of freedom of speech
  • Honoring of the truth
  • Rejection of identity politics
  • Regard for the individual
  • People who don’t want them to speak their truth
  • Courage

 

What is this critical darker web category?

Since putting up the site, I’ve had lots of interesting conversations and feedback and plenty of it has been contradictory. Being a middle-way sort of person, I didn’t want to remove people from the website, despite reasons for doing so being… reasonable. For instance, people have said such things as:

  • What is X doing on there? They’re not dark
  • Some of the people who aren’t careful with their words discredit others by association
  • Some of the people aren’t terribly intellectual
  • Such a grouping creates its own orthodoxy
  • This list is too safe

They are points that I’ve considered and I won’t respond to them in words right now but in action. I’ve added tags to separate people’s roles and two categories: intellectual dark web and critical darker web.

The group in the intellectual dark web category are some of the people that Eric Weinstein was alluding to when he used the term and others of that mould. They seem to be where ideas are sparked and disseminated.

The critical darker web is how I’m referencing a similar and connected group containing people that massage and apply the ideas from the original group. They can be any of:

  • less visible than those in the initial group but combine for a similar effect
  • even more controversial and less palatable to mainstream media but still guided by science and reason
  • speak to a considerably different audience than the original group
  • use lines of thinking from the original group to apply focused critiques

These are, of course, extremely subjective placements and it’s hard for them to be anything but when dealing with such ill-defined things.

There are some very interesting suggestions for people and organisations coming through that I would categorise into this critical darker web. I think we can have a lot of fun with it!

 

Why isn’t X on this site?

Do you think that someone should be added to the list? Leave a comment below. You can log in with twitter or another social account.

If people agree, I can put them up. Or I won’t.

 

There’s a mistake on this website

Highly likely. let me know below.

 

This site could be used against the people on it

That is possible. But the people on this website have decided to take a stand. This is just one more door to their ideas.

If you’re on the site and don’t want to be, please let me know.

 

Isn’t the name intellectual dark web kind of cringey?

Yeah, but so’s your face. 😉

 

This website is bad because X

I hope it’s useful to someone. It’s been a curious thing for me. Please, try not to take life too seriously and remember, I’m just some nitwit on the interwebs.

❤ Thanks to this merry crew of nerds and especially, EW, for doing your thing.

229 Responses

    • Daniel Frank

      Hmm Peter Schiff huh? I do listen to him and enjoy his doomsday mindset. But how do you suppose he should be apart of the movement of the dark web? Also, yes Thomas Sowell 100 times.

      Reply
    • Eli

      I vote no to Tom Woods and Peter Schiff. I’m okay with Thomas Sowell.

      Reply
      • Deon

        Woods and Schiff should absolutely be on this list. Another great addition would be the great Walter Williams.

  1. Ryan Dee (@Ryan__Dee)

    I really think Brendan O’Neill should be on there. He’s not directly connected to the others but has been doggedly fighting the same battles for years and is a great writer and debater. At least one token “Marxist” is needed for viewpoint diversity. 😉

    Brendan O’Neill and Dave Rubin: Free Speech, and Hypocrisy of the Radical Left and Antifa

    Reply
  2. John Doe

    You should consider adding Janice Fiamengo. She’s been fighting for the truth for years. Check out “StudioBrule” on youtube for bunch of her content.

    Reply
    • don

      He’s awesome, but might not want to be on here; he’s publicity shy and seems to try (and fail) to be somewhat hands-off about culture war topics. Maybe ask him first?

      Reply
    • Eli

      I think he would be a great fit. He can be on here and remain anonymous.

      Reply
  3. Gazime (@GazimeClod)

    You added “enforced” before references to the Evergreen day of absence, this is incorrect, as was emphasized repeatedly by Bret himself. It was not a mandatory event let alone one with any ability to punish those who did not partake in attending, and there were not even enough seats to support the entire faculty/student body were they to all try and attend. The implication of being an “enemy” should one opt out of attending this sort of event is a problem, but hyperbole does not help the situation, especially when paired with the laughably partisan language used on the rest of this website. It is an absolute shame the few brilliant figures on this list have attracted a following so disingenuous in their promotion of “viewpoint diversity.” Individualism and many of the moderate conservative/centrist ideas of the supposed Dark Web are immensely valuable, but pretending it is some un-dogmatic bubble of free thought is embarrassing.

    Reply
    • edustentialist

      I’ve made a change to Bret’s page based on what you have said, using a phrase from the article that he wrote. I wasn’t engaging in hyperbole, it’s difficult to understand exactly what went down on the day.
      When you say, “It was not a mandatory event let alone one with any ability to punish those who did not partake in attending”, it seems that it was mandatory based on the reaction by students and some staff who did punish Bret and Heather. I am of course making the assumption that the organisers of the event were part of the reaction.
      I don’t understand your second point. What do you mean by that some have “attracted a following so disingenuous in their promotion of “viewpoint diversity.””? Could you explain further?

      Reply
      • Gazime

        Sure. The values of individualism, rationality, and the rest of the western tradition espoused by those in this bubble are great; they are in my opinion probably the best we have been able to come up with. That said, the idea that they represent a diverse set of opinions is absolutely ludicrous unless you take an incredibly myopic view of intellectual diversity that limits itself to a small portion of the globe in the last few hundred years. It is absolutely fine for academics and public figures to aggressively promote their own viewpoints while being completely antagonistic to those who disagree, but that can’t seriously be considered an attempt at open-mindedness and an embrace of discourse. This problem is made significantly worse when someone like Jordan Peterson uses labels like “postmodern” and “neomarxist” for his opponents so liberally that they cease to have any valuable meaning, let alone doing so to an audience who almost certainly have not made a sincere attempt to engage with the ideas of the postmodernists. Postmodernism is a movement which I disagree with about as strongly as any other, but it would be arrogant beyond belief to suggest that its concepts are so self-evidently wrong or harmful that they do not deserve serious engagement. There is no real difference between those who define the “intellectually diverse/critical thinkers” as anyone operating within an individualist/rationalist perspective and those who claim “freedom” can only exist with the proper social correctives/elimination of privilege, in both cases the spirit of the original term has been completely done away with in the service of ideology. It has been a depressing few years as someone who truly values diversity of viewpoints to watch what seemed to a truly liberal movement turn into something indistinguishable from the dogmatic champions of social justice, complete with the buzzwords and outrage mongering. To see exceptionally sharp/creative minds who appear to be sincerely committed to intellectual progress and the elimination of rigid ideology like Jonathan Haidt, Stephen Pinker, Eric Weinstein, Sam Harris, and Peterson (at his best) listed alongside charlatans and propagandists like Steven Crowder, David Rubin and Gad Saad (at his worst) strikes me as evidence that it was unfortunately a movement built on uncritical opposition to “the left,” rather than a genuine embrace of the value of diversity/open-mindedness. Hopefully I am wrong.

      • Internaut

        I agree with Gazime.

        We are intrinsically limited by experience, history and context – our environment – so we don’t really see the edges of the Overton Window.

        I repeat: there is a severe threat you’re just purposing Liberalism 1.01

        The problem with Liberalism is that it degenerated into being solely about class discrimination, that is the future we are living in.

        This is a far cry from the original ideal – the use of scientific knowledge and processes to improve society e.g. social world, political world not being hermetically sealed off from scientific investigation, reason.

        Personally I think we are in a loop, and that we have arrived back at the point where rationality has been defacto sealed off from the rest of the world we’ve developed since the original Enlightenment.

        Think of how banks constantly talk about innovation, technology, but really represent nothing like that.

        Our society talks of biotechnology, energy improvements, human health, things like this, while it is actually doing everything in its power to prevent changes in these areas.

        Western society has been dysfunctional in a way it wasn’t before, some on the right call it ‘degeneration’, a loaded word but I believe it’s pretty straight and accurate – we’re going down and most of us don’t even believe it, despite all the signs being there.

        Peter Thiel, he owns large portions of Silicon Valley, he gets it. Our human generated environment – even the computer part – it’s getting old. All this talk of change is a smokescreen for the very real fact – measured either by economists (productivity numbers) or by narratives from previous periods – that there no real change – we are stagnating – that is why the rise of the reactionaries is overdue.

        Liberals, the modern incarnation – they don’t like it. They don’t want to believe they’re part of a stagnant system – it goes against everything they believe in.

        Note: Liberals don’t mean Democratic party, this is a reference to the Enlightenment political tradition.

      • Deon

        Gazime, how are Crowder, Rubin and Gad Saad “charlatans and propagandists?” And the people Peterson is talking about are post-modernists and neo-marxists. They openly admit it.

    • halfjew22

      Do you talk with them on a regular basis? If so-that’s really cool. They’re inspirational thinkers and a necessary good to help figure out what the hell is going on!

      Reply
  4. Martin Totland (@mtotland)

    Suggest adding Hunter Maats and Bryan Callen from the Mixed Mental Arts podcast – they take similar stands as the other individuals listed on this site and release a continual stream of engaging podcasts where they have conversations with authors, scientists, researchers, etc.

    Reply
      • Madeleine Lamb (@MadLambx)

        Bitcoin and blockchain are game-changers and Andreas Antonopoulos is the premiere philosopher on the topic. I think Andreas’s talks are an important part of game-b conversation even if a direct connection has not been made with core IDW.

        It’s just a suggestion anyway. Others that I think should be considered have already been suggested by others on this page.

      • Rubin Applebaum

        I agree, this group should be focused on protecting a future for our collective Jewish identity.

      • Internaut

        “I agree, this group should be focused on protecting a future for our collective Jewish identity.”

        Loving the sound of the crickets here – I might go deaf.

  5. Patrick Lockwood

    These are my kind of people. It’s nice seeing others who talk about ideas of importance with candor and intellectual honesty, even if people disagree.

    Reply
  6. MR

    Helen Pluckrose
    John McWhorter
    Iona Italia
    Glenn Loury
    John Gray (author of straw dogs)
    Nassim Taleb

    Reply
  7. edustentialist

    Thanks for the great ideas and feedback everyone. I’ll be adding more in the next couple of days.

    Reply
  8. Bobadinga

    ‘connected group containing people that massage’, should be message

    Reply
    • edustentialist

      Thanks for the feedback. I’m going for the word massage in this case, as in, they work with the ideas and play with them.

      Reply
  9. Dave

    It appears to me, that if you don’t communicate with the core group of people that coined (Eric Weinstein) and spread (Dave Rubin, Bret Weinstein, Joe Rogan, Jordan Peterson, David Fuller) the phrase intellectual dark web, a get a better understanding of the idea and movement, then you will end up adding so many people for so many reasons that it will lose all meaning and your website will lose all purpose and meaning.

    Reply
    • edustentialist

      I have tried to talk to some of them. I’ll have another crack. I would love to get their thoughts.
      It would definitely be good to get a better understanding of Eric’s conception. Hopefully, he has more to say on the topic.
      You outline a distinct possibility. There is a risk to adding many more (but not so big, this is just a silly little website after all) but I think it is outweighed by the positive of bringing light to further worthwhile people.
      My attempt so far at mitigating it becoming meaningless is to add tags and a second category that isn’t the core group (critical darker web).
      I guess we’ll see when I do my next big add and you can decide for yourself.
      Thanks for the feedback!

      Reply
      • halfjew22

        I’ve got an interesting idea that might help get their attention or at least increase the chances of doing so. I’ll ping you on Twitter

  10. Dennisland

    I like the mix of critical thinkers and I hope this develops as intendid, into a positive forum for lateral ideas. I am still left a little confused whether the curated approach is favoured because it’s a way to sift out those with a ulterior agenda, or if it seems very elitist, this goes against solidarity and closes out undiscovered ingenuity. Society is struggling with reality at the moment and the idea of celebrity is one big contributing factor.There are many people I could suggest, most are artists not personalities. Chris Hedges falls into the later if this is the model. Good luck.

    Reply
  11. Göran Ingvarsson

    I haven’t as yet figured out your name but… Thank you Dear Sir for a great website based on an intelligent, well thought-out idea! I read abot it on bigthink.com and immediately headed on over here. You now have a new, grateful follower in Sweden (a country of hypocrisy, political correctness, and expected consensus that it is hard to live with).

    Reply
  12. jburgess74

    The Knife Media would be a great addition as an “organization”. Calling out media bias from both sides and giving a facts-only view of major news stories.

    Reply
  13. jburgess74

    Also consider Jason Whitlock and Clay Travis from sports media. They are making the same arguments in that sphere.

    Reply
  14. Internaut

    You should add Scott Alexander to this list.

    However I question the premise of what you’re engaging with a bit.

    There’s nothing wrong with being a freethinker and a Liberal (not party, political philosophy), but don’t confuse the two. Liberals have lost their mettle over the last half century or so, they don’t actually know the arguments on the other side anymore. Plenty of political Liberals have been quick to fling labels like “Nazi” or “Communist” around. I call them Zenomorphs, because they fit the anti-Semitic caricature (shape shifting) perfectly – these people who claim to be “Liberal” but they shape shift into Leftists or Rightists depending on the context, going with whatever if fashionable or popular – this is sometimes called ‘mood affiliation’.

    If you want to reinvigorate old Western ideals of Liberalism you’re going to need to do better than Stephen Pinker or Jordan Peterson or Douglas Murray because despite advocacy for steelmanning these people don’t engage directly with intellectually serious opponents like Curtis Yarvin or Jared Taylor. They fall back on the very no-platforming they claim to dislike, thinking of it as ceding territory. Attacking the likes of /pol/ or the SJWs is easy mode folks. EASY MODE. You should be attacking the Generals, not the foot soldiers, if you’re intellectually serious.

    Very very few people who use the word “Alt-Right” or “SJW” are actually capable of explaining the opposition ideas, they simply pin the wings of the weakest arguments. That’s really not good enough. Liberals are responsible for totalitarianism in the same way as the Communists and Facsists were, it’s just that we do not see it as such because most Westerners are a species of Liberal. Look at how many people basically agree with Tony Blair and G. Bush in the light of the Arab Spring – that blood is on Liberal hands, not political extremists of the Far Right or Far Left.

    TLDR; If you think you’re going to win every argument from the Far Right or Far Left you’re just another kind of delusional. Sometimes Liberals are wrong. If you are truly a freethinker you have to expand the Overton Window to include the extremes or you’re not giving the enemy a fair trial, you’re just wallowing in Western political orthodoxy and calling it fresh and original thinking.

    Reply
  15. Internaut

    Oh you should definitely add David Friedman, he’s a genuine freethinker, he really gets his feet comfortable in other people’s shoes.

    You want to get somebody like Friedman arguing with Nick Land. Or Gwern vs basically anybody. That would be terrific. I’d take that over gundams fighting on the Tokyo skyline.

    I’ll tell you what annoys me. This idea that you develop a political idea, and that if it seems internally consistent and produces something positive like economic growth or intellectual development – then it’s fine and good and we should adopt that for our banner. We then feel good about ourselves.

    It sounds reasonable but it’s absurd. It’s putting the “Divine Right of Kings” into the same box as “Equality and Freedom”

    I want more people to discuss the metapolitics of Western thought. Why do we believe one thing is a solid basis for society in 1750 and another in 2050. It’s very striking how Moldbug has been able to drag up ancient ideas, repackage them, and their percolation spiral throughout the West has damaged the credibility of Liberalism because so few in our intelligentsia were capable of realizing what a mad ferret had been let loose, let alone tackling them with argument. It took the New York Times and National Review 10 years, Ten Years! to get an “oh shit” moment – kind of bad.

    Things like Evolution Theory, Technology, Ecology – almost nothing from these areas is ever integrated into our political thought, our intellectual thought is treated as standalone just like Plato’s description for forms of government. Platonic ideals pure and clean, abstracted from anything real and messy.

    If you really really want to lift the bar, you’re going to have to develop ideas around Networks or what is technically Internets, of the relationships between networks of ideas.

    Is anybody really up for that? Or is this going to be Liberalism v1.01

    Reply
  16. Internaut

    Obviously most of the listed are right wing-ish or liberal-ish but I think there’s also a large space of unconventional thought on the Left too – I’m thinking of the Left wing hereditarians, non-Marxist egalitarians. Their voices should be heard too.

    As I see there are a lot of political dualities and you should have some people from each side of each duality if you want anything interesting to happen.

    Left vs Right
    Authoritarian vs Liberal
    Anarchist vs Reactionary

    I think that accounts for 90% of the West, then there’s other groups like the Deep Ecologists and Transhumanists – which are kind of Internet era political philosophy.

    Reply
  17. Ed Mikos

    You might want to add Dr. Leonard Sax for his extensive writing and speaking on the biological/social/psychological differences between boys and girls, which has become taboo as of late.

    Reply
  18. Nico Smets

    Where is Milo Yiannopoulos? Sure, he’s a bit “special”, but the role of the joker should not be underestimated.

    Reply
    • Dan

      Yes, where is Milo? If the criticism is that Milo has been identitarian or nationalist, it should be noted that Ben Shapiro too has been identitarian and nationalist, just in a different way.

      Reply
  19. Mike Cross

    Akira the Don is not your stereotypical intellectual. But he is evidently prepared to shoulder his share of the burden and walk in the direction, in Jordan Peterson’s words, of incarnating the spirit of the logos. Likewise, Jordan Peterson describes himself as not an intellectual, exactly, since he subordinates ideas to action. My point is that the word “intellectual,” which I for one find off-putting, might also fail to reflect the criterion you are actually using, when you include in this Dark Web the likes of Akira the Don, Joe Rogan and Jordan Peterson.. Is it too late to change it now? Does anybody have any better suggestions? Logos-serving Dark Web? Logos-centred Dark Web?

    Reply
    • Echo Chamber (@EchoChamber451)

      Yeah, Idk, I always get him and Cernivich mixed up. I think both are too far into the right wing conspiracy BS, although I disagree with Weiss that the IDW needs to be careful not to be be associated with those folks. The IDW is all about exploring ideas, even bad ones. Hence the name. The mainstream media is going to associate everyone who doesn’t kiss the ring of corporate PC right thinkers with the baddies anyway.

      Reply
      • Deon

        He definitely should be on here. One of the truth tellers.

      • Dan

        “How about Molyneux? He should he on here.”

        Didn’t you know? This isn’t the dark web, it is the partly-cloudy-with-scattered-afternoon-showers web.

  20. Loula Belle (@loulabelleaus)

    Please consider adding Cassie Jaye and Martin Daubney. Both have interesting things to say about gender roles and both speak out in opposition to mainstream feminist orthodoxy.

    Reply
  21. A Kermode Bear (@AKermodeBear)

    I feel that Glenn Beck should be on this site as well. He has been very much a “facts over feelings” person for a long while, and he has been instrumental in getting people with different views to talk together. Beck has done shows with Rubin, Petersen, and other free thinkers and had some wonderful, engaging discussions. He has also been known to change his mind as new facts reveal themselves, instead of just explaining it all away.

    He adamant on freedom of speech, religion, and association. He is willing to examine and discuss ideas that he strongly disagrees with, such as UBI, and tries to understand the positions of those who disagree with him. He’s creative, and he, too, has paid the price for opening his mouth – first at CNN and then at FNC (and sometimes with his own viewers as well) – so he launched his own television network when everyone said it couldn’t happen – and it struggles, but it is still around.

    Reply
  22. Rob

    thanks for doing this, this is great – it’s like my Drudge for my podcasts/youtube channels (Drudge got me here).

    Reply
  23. Eli

    Nassim Taleb
    David Friedman
    Scott Alexander
    Thomas Sowell

    Reply
  24. Marc Whittemore

    Finally there’s some traction for and a place where free thinkers can unite and debate and listen without the fascists dogging and pouncing on every sentence, throwing hypocritical hissey fits and tantrums. As a Gay conservative I have been totally ostracized by the Leftists. Fine by me. I’m not the lemming one. I LOOOOVE Ben Shapiro, Jordan Bret Eric and the rest.

    http://WWW.GAYSWITHGUNS.NET
    https://www.meetup.com/Gays-With-Guns/

    Reply
  25. Samuel Hyde

    A big list of Jewish gatekeepers, presented as le real edgy subversives by the Jew York Times.

    Typical tricks, Shlomo.

    Reply
  26. Gerald Schoenewolf

    What a refreshing site. I would like to nominate myself, Gerald Schoenewolf. I’m a controversial blogger on psychcentral.com. I’m the author of a number of controversial psychoanalytic books, such as Psychoanalytic Centrism. I’m editor of an online journal, The Journal of Free Thought. America right now (and much of the Western World), has been taken over by a mob. This mob, as many on this site have said, punishes all who disagrees with it; the mob demonizes them, persecutes them and dehumanizes them.. If possible it takes away their livelihood and destroys their reputation and identity. People are afraid to say what they think or what they feel because the mob will come down on you as soon as you say it and call you one of their names, such as “sexist,” “racist,” “homophobe,” “white supremacist” and others. This mob is the largest terrorist group in the West. It prevents free thinkers from saying their thoughts, artists from producing honest art, writers from generating literature that “holds the mirror to nature, scientists from doing meaningful research that goes against the ruling ideology, psychologists from doing authentic research on human behavior (that isn’t politically correct). The mob has taken over most colleges and universities, as well as all education, beginning with nursery school. it has taken over Hollywood and book publishing. It has taken over the Democratic Party and part of the Republican party. It has taken over most of those now governing us. This Intellectual Dark Web is breath of fresh words, a place where one can actually have an uncensored conversation and exchange views without being immediately attacked by a thousand angry and menacing voices, like a happy flounder trying to swim through a school of sharks. This site provides hope for those who feared that sanity had completely disappeared from the landscape. I’m 76 years old and have lived through decades of the developing mob, and have been trashed and persecuted by it. Thank you for starting this site. It’s such a needed resource.

    Reply
  27. Justin Anderson

    Great work guys. Definitely need Scott Adams on here. #2 after JP

    Reply
    • spiff

      Yep. Writes blogs and does videos about how iconic people like Trump or Kanye use special methods to persuade people.
      Also writes about mass hysterias, and reframing problems so that we’re able to look at them in a different light. He has made me see reality in a different way.
      He has been attacked/criticized by media outlets as well. Strongly rational.

      Reply
  28. Deon

    Robert Spencer, Richard Dawkins, Yaron Brook, Ibn Warraq, Bill Warner, David Horowitz.

    Reply
  29. Fabio L. Leite

    Nominating Olavo de Carvalho.

    Consider including Olavo de Carvalho in your list. He`s done for Brazil singlehandedly what all the others are doing for the US, with thousands of online students in his course of philosophy. See his online work:

    Collection of Olavo de Carvalho`s online resources in English.

    Some old philosophy handouts translated by Google (Portuguese to English translations have become almost entirely correct in the last years and very readable). If you feel comfortable with the automatic translations, I would recommend you browse the whole site.

    https://is.gd/fwEGw3

    Translations of his online philosophical diary on Facebook, made mostly by me:

    https://olavodecarvalhofb.wordpress.com/category/english/

    Online videos subtitled in English on various philosophical subjects.

    https://www.youtube.com/cha…/UC4xsj-xJYlAbT0PXb2PVLaw/videos

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5DgZFjS9R05Ib_4gMfinYA

    Newspaper articles translated by real people. He considers most of them case studies of his philosophy applied to politics. That is why I gave the links for the philosophical works first. The study of the real life issues is founded on what is there.

    http://www.olavodecarvalho.org/category/english/

    A more detailed case study is Olavo’s debate with Alexander Dugin, who is Putin’s most important intellectual influence. They debated the role of the US in the world today (although “today” is the Obama era when the debate happened).

    http://debateolavodugin.blogspot.com/

    Online videos subtitled in English where several political issues of the day are discussed.

    Reply
  30. Nolan

    Definitely need a page for Jason Stapleton on this here website.

    Reply
  31. Philippa

    Thanks for setting up this website. Please add Peter Hitchens. Also what about Edward Snowden and Daniel Ellseberg?

    Reply
  32. joe

    You should add Simón Eduardo Manso. He is a mechanical engineer, and a writer, that specializes in aggregating scientific and mathematical principles to illuminate poorly understood phenomenon. He also does it, without boring the reader to death.

    https://www.facebook.com/eddie.manso.1

    Reply
    • joe

      SEM is working on a book with the working title ‘The Neo-Bible’. This is a new bible, that incorporates knowledge and information gained from modern technology. It is meant to replace the old bible, with a modern interpretation that contains more information, and is much more readable than scripture. It is intended to be easy to understand, and is targeting a wider audience. Also, it incorporates math and science with philosophy, which almost every single religion fails to do. The Neo-Bible, will not only reveal the ‘secret of life’, but it will make sense. It’s not just a story, it’s a perfect reflection of reality. It is intended to provide a framework, which any human can use to then understand the nature of the universe.

      Please note: This is a work in progress, that may not be finished in my lifetime. That is why I want to post it, so somebody could potentially use my knowledge, in the future. I have no idea when the Neo-Bible will be finished, and honestly, I’m in no rush. If it is published the day before I die, then I would think that was ideal. I want it to be the best book I have ever written. And, I can’t do that easily, if it is my first book. So, for now, it is a work in progress, and I have no intention to sell it for money. I will create other books, that I intend to sell. But, the Neo-Bible is not for sale, because that would compromise the integrity of it. I will likely start a non-profit organization to distribute the Neo-Bible up on publication.

      A short excerpt:

      The Holy Grail, is ‘the key’ that unlocks the secrets of the scripture in the Bible. It’s one thing to have a Bible, but you need a person, to decipher it for you. That person is the ‘Holy Grail’. If you can correctly decipher the scripture, you will obtain the secrets to life. In this way, the ‘Holy Grail’ can be lost, and reborn. Given enough time, another person will be born, who uses that information, to make the next Bible. And so, on until….who knows.

      Obviously, our future is determined by our past. It doesn’t look good for humans, but don’t set your sights so short. It’s easy to prove, that intelligent life is likely to be out there, somewhere else. Hopefully, we reincarnate to one of those more ‘heavenly’ bodies. One of the more essential revelations is feedback. The principal reason, why I believe that reincarnation is real, and it is meant to be, is because it engenders a sense of responsibility. It is a built-in self-limiting function, that prevents you from doing ‘bad’ things. In fact, if you look at it figuratively, then you could see that reincarnation is a type of ‘heaven or hell’ scenario.

      Because, the reality is that if you believe you are going to be reborn, it gives you incentive to leave the Earth (or whatever planet you are on) the same way that you found it, or a close approximation. In a way, reincarnation itself can either be ‘heaven’ or, ‘hell’. Because, heaven would mean that you were reborn into a ‘better’ Earth. And, hell would mean that you were reborn into a ‘worse’ Earth. If you don’t take care of your home, in this lifetime, you guarantee yourself to be born in a ‘hell’ which is really just figurative language for a shitty, polluted toxic dump where you are born mutated into some grotesque body. It seems pretty simple to me. When I go camping, I do my best to leave everything as undisturbed as possible. (It’s also a good tactic if you want to prevent yourself from being tracked easily.)

      But, I digress….anyway, what was I on about…oh yeah. The real problem with religion, is that too many people take what they read too literally. I’m telling you, as a writer, we take great pains to make sure that we use the perfect metaphor. But, the purpose of that is not to confuse people, but rather give you a mental image of something that is difficult to explain otherwise. Also, people like stories, they like to know where they are at in the timeline, and by the end, they want to know the sequence of events. The gratification comes from putting the puzzle together yourself. I am pretty sure you get a nice dopamine reward from good ‘ole Mamma Nature.

      One of the aspects, is that it becomes difficult to understand in a way that people can use it. It’s a lot of wisdom, but it’s difficult to decipher that wisdom. You see what I am saying? So, writers (aka scribes) have existed forever. They are one of the oldest human archetypes. If you can imagine, it was probably the artists for a long time, but steadily, humans developed written language. Writing is really just a symbolic form of art. The words have meaning, and you take a ‘sea of pieces’ that are jumbled, and out of sequence, and only YOU alone can solve that puzzle. So, we have all this fundamental human knowledge, right now. Our technology is modern, but our faith is ancient. We haven’t updated our model for the universe to include what has been recently discovered in science.

      One of my goals, before I die, is to finish the ‘Neo-Bible’. A collection of stories, allegories, and aphorisms. But, the difference is that it will have pictures, and it will start with the basics, from a fundamental level. The Neo-Bible is intended to be accessible. I would love to think that because I have a sense of ‘faith’ in math, that I would be come some kind of ‘math prophet’. But, anyway, I digress…so, the Neo-Bible is being written as we speak. It will incorporate fractal mathematics, chaos theory, game theory, probability, and statistics. It will probably be composed of a few essential characters. Probably some more long dialogues. Using a Meta and ‘the Fizz’ comedy pair. Maybe some girl dialogue, boy/girl, girl/girl? Maybe….I will make SIMPLE analogies, and provide many pictures, and make certain most of all, to make it readable. I would love for it to have characters, but I’m not sure about that. I think it might just be a God narrated piece. The point is, that hopefully even a teenager can read it. Because my intention is to share the secrets that I possess (and took a long time to earn.) I don’t care about the dough. I don’t want to compromise the Neo-Bible…if I could, I would probably try to crowd fund it.

      Seventh Heaven, and the Seven Chakras

      When I was really young, there was a book called ‘The Seventh Heaven’. Essentially dividing the world into seven different levels, or states of consciousness. Let’s use this as a tool to explore why such a book would come into existence. Considering, what I am about to say, please remember, that every single human is experiencing the same essential human experience in the world (i.e. we all possess the same intrinsic potential.) But, that experience is ‘tinged’ by the mental state of the human percieving such events. Therefore, whether you ‘understand’ what is happening or not, it’s important to remember that we are still experiencing it. That means, one person will have an explanation, and maybe another will have an excuse, but they will still experience the same thing. This applies to language, especially. Each langauage seeks to explain the same world, but they all have a different ‘language’ to do it. Obviously, the differences between languages can be insignificant, or profound, depending on the subject. The main point, is that we are giving different names, for the same ‘things’. This extends into concepts like ‘Seventh Heaven’ or ‘Seven Chakras’.

      Jacob’s Ladder Electrical Phenomenon

      I’m not too biblical, but I want to point out, that we are going to illuminate the same thing, but in the physical world. It’s not just a spiritual phenomenon. Because, the Jacob’s Ladder, is an electrical ‘toy’. But, it works in a very similiar way. It is the equivalent, of taking two mirrors, and boucing a laser between them. If you angle the mirrors upward even slightly, the reflections increase, and the light climbs ‘a ladder’ into the air. This works with light, and with electricity, to same effect.

      Body Ladder

      Now, we will attempt to connect a physical phenomenon with a simliar metaphysical phenonmenon. Because, the Seventh Heaven, is a lot like the Seven Chakras. Both describe a ‘layering’ type phenomenon. A ‘ladder’ that one can ascend, both emotionally and spiritually. But, the important aspect, is that this finds weight in the physical. It turns out, that the human spinal column actually mirrors this ‘ladder’.

      And, indeed, for humans, it has long since been known, that this was the center of our nervous system. But, when you consider what vertical physical alignment of the spine does, and how it allows energy to be directly channeled from the core of your body, and ‘float up’ or ‘climb the ladder’ into your brain, and ‘elevate’, or ‘enlighten’ you into a higher state of consciousness. This is the Jacob’s Ladder of the Body, in all regards.

      Spiritual Ladder

      Yet, if there is a physical Jacob’s Ladder, as indeed, there is. Then why not have a ‘Spiritual Jacob’s Ladder’? If it exists in the physical world, it must be mirrored in the metaphysical world. After one, works on mediation, and aligning their spine, they can reach higher levels of conscious thought. But, by doing so, another type of effect takes place. The mind begins to expand. An undeniable, but steady inflation takes place, to where your mind suddenly occupies the entirety of the universe, as you know it.

      Indeed, even the atmosphere of the earth is arranged, in stairstep fashion, just like the Jacob’s Ladder. If a human can physically leave the Earth, then he inevitably takes his mind with him. In this modern era, we have been able to visually explore our solar system, and we can finally perceive a much higher level of awareness, and thus, consciousness. We have become more that just Earthlings. We are truly now, Solarlings.

      Interestingly, there seems to be no real upper limit to the ladder (besides the size of the universe). The ‘layering’ is what is significant. On Earth, the ocean is composed of ‘layers’ or ‘levels’. But so does the atmosphere. If you ‘ascend the levels’…by following the ‘staircase to heaven’, you realize the underlying structure. The reality, is that humans are born on the bottom rungs of the ladder. It is not only an opportunity to climb this ladder, but it actually has become a spiritual necessity. Climbing the ladder allows you to disassociate from the chaos, and suffering of the ‘real world’ around you.

      This inflation or elevation, is not without a series of important fringe benefits. Not only are you high above the fray, you have a detached feeling for it. It is not your mess, anymore. It is somebody else’s mess, because you have decided to let go. When you embrace detachment (i.e. letting go) then you can float freely, like smoke, unencumbered by the weight, and shame that you normally experience. This mirrors the ‘so woke’ sensation, and that is not a coincidence.

      Obtaining a perspective on life, has a tremendous amount of ancillary benefits. It allows you to act with better clarity. I think it is the fundamental difference, between being stuck in our reptilian nature, or ascending, and following the path of enlightenment. Obviously, it’s a ‘no-brainer’ to me.

      The Fractal Dilemma

      Obviously, IDK everything. Nobody does, and no single person ever will. It’s easy to see why, because the more you specialize, the more you sacrifice. It’s a quantity vs. quality issue. Some people are good at math, some people are good at science. some people are good at both. But, nobody can perfectly replicate anybody else’s skills. So I’m a big picture guy, but obviously, I have sacrificed intimate knowledge of specific subjects. I wouldn’t call my self much of an ‘expert’ on much of anything, although I am a pretty good mechanical engineer.

      The trait that I am most proud of, is my multi-faceted approach. I pride myself on being a big picture, big question type of person. So, I do believe there is a more complex structure at play in certain scientific ‘simplifications’. The reality, is that our models are truly one or 2 dimensional. They don’t perfectly capture the ‘real thing’. Therefore we are always going to be in a process of ‘catching up to reality’. Our models, will always need to be regularly updated. The Neo-Bible, certainly wouldn’t be the last Bible (if we can help it.) One of the dilemmas, for me personally, is that I absolutely know that the Periodic Table is unfinished. It is not a logical structure, the 2D one that we have. It does not incorporate HOW those elements were made, and in what order.

      Fundamentally, I believe that the Periodic Table, as it stands is a place-holder. The real ‘form’ of the Table, should be a Tree Structure. I believe that, at the core of my being. The final, or next iteration, should at least, incorporate a branching tree structure. Of course, at the root would like Hydrogen. And in the first branch Helium, and the next, Lithium. From there, it is difficult for me to know where to go. I am not a Chemist. It’s not my specialty. But, I do think there is more to structure. I am not the first person to try to draw a 3D Periodic Table. But, I may be one of the few people to think that it is a fractal.

      The Fractal Universe

      Obviously, I am using the shoulders of great genius like Turing. I didn’t not invent human knowledge, personally, I just agree with it, and use that knowledge to peak into the future. Whether or not, I can furnish mathematical proofs to ‘prove’ the logic, is immaterial. It also doesn’t really matter. At some fundamental level, we all start with an assumption.So, ‘faith’ in religion, is sadly, the same ‘faith’ that we have in science and math. These are not ‘finished’…because they are ‘works in progress’. You can take a snapshot, and judge it, but it’s meaningless, because that snapshot was in the past, as soon as you saw it. We are on an eternal ladder of creation. What matters is the next rung, not the last. I hope you can see that. Regardless, if you’re a ‘genius’ or not. It’s important to understand the nature of reality.

      Turing appeared to be looking for a general mechanism for the creation of form — like how thought or consciousness spontaneously emerges or how sunflowers neatly pack their seeds together. But Turing would die before completing and publishing his final musings.

      Ok, but Turing was not privy to the information we now have. It is unlikely that he could’ve seen the implications of computers generating fractal geometries. The stuff we now take for granted, was the ‘fantasy’ of men like Turing. But Turing would die before completing and publishing his final musings. Also, stop focusing on the man, and focus more on the ideas. Turing didn’t invent this stuff, he was just interpreting it. We are still too attached to this idea of ‘genius’. In that one man, above all others is ‘better’ than the rest. Certainly, there is some truth to this because many people receive the same education, and some blossom for it, and others are lost in it. But, I think these differences, are imposed, and are unnatural.

      If we all had the same education, and learned the same facts, the reality is that we all posses that same potential. We just choose different subjects in which to pour ourselves into. Maybe we can use more Turings, but what we really need, is for every human to evolve into a higher-order being. When a human moves from person into ‘hero’ or ‘superhero’, they effectively sacrifice their well-being for others. We need that kind of gesture, across cultures, and time itself. Self-sacrifice is not an option, it is a fundamental aspect of human progress and evolution. If humans cooperated the same way that ants cooperate, we would be colonizing space in no time. It’s not about what one individual does, but rather, how that one individual inspires us all, to ‘rise above’ and interact on higher spiritual plane. Again, the ‘tide that lifts all boats’.

      In this regard, we stop fighting, and start working together collectively. If we do that, truly there are no limits to human potential. We just need to follow through on our ideals. Also, the way I explain the ‘creation of form’, is actually quite simple. What is a seed? A seed contains all the information necessary to grow a plant or an animal. Also, an ‘egg’ is an animal seed. I’m talking about ‘seed’ in a very abstract way. But, we know that the seed is tiny, and insignificant compared to the ‘end result’. Just looking at the seed, you cannot predict how the final form will appear. But, you do know, that the seed contains the instructions, that the lifeform will use, in order to grow. The growth potential is the same between all seeds. The differences, depend on where the seed spawns. The location of germination, is what determines the size, and extent of the structure that follows. (If a seed, falls in water, it dies, but if a seed falls on land, in a nice location, with water and sunshine, it ‘explodes into growth’. The fact is, the seed will only grow, in a certain location, in certain specific conditions, which are conducive to life. In this case, life is a ‘finely tuned’ conditional form.

      Life grows, because it has found the right conditions for it to grow. The seed will not germinate, until those conditions arise. Let’s use this idea, to illuminate something greater, that goes beyond plants and animals, and extends into the universe itself. The seed, in a pure abstract symbolic form, contains the ‘recipe to bake the cake.’ That is, the information is stored, and that information, while incredibly potent, is not enough. The seed still needs to find a ‘home’ that allows it to grow and prosper. In a purely abstract interpretation, I believe that the Universe operates in a similar way.

      The Big Bang, is a product of a seed finding its home. As soon as ‘the seed that generated the universe’ germinated, it began to grow exponentially. The conditions for that growth were ‘just right’…or it wouldn’t have happened. This seed, of course, is best described as a fractal potential. When the seed germinates, it is like the Fibonacci Sequence. It starts from ‘1, then 2, then 3, then 5, then 8, then 13, then 21. As you can see, the product is the sum of the numbers that preceded it. This is EXACTLY how all forms of life grow. The ‘feedback’ process is the daily cycle. All forms of life collect energy, and store that energy, to survive, and thrive, now and into the future. So, all forms of life, are fractals…in fact, all forms in the universe are fractals.

      The Universe itself is one gigantic fractal form. All forms of life rely on a ‘feedback loop’, which is the same thing as an ‘iteration’, in the domain of fractal geometry. Each iteration, generates a copy, of what preceded it. Each leaf on a plant is a copy of the plant. Extending this further, we see that each human born, is a copy of all the other humans. Their are differences between each leaf, but that is a product of their location. Just like humans, we grow like fractals. Each individual human is a copy of the humans that preceded it.

      This is how all life, and fractal geometry mirror each other. This is not a coincidence, and should not be treated as such. Humans exist, because we are part of the recipe (a body in time, forms a mind). When you bake the cake, that is when the recipe takes final form. That is when we see the results or the ‘solution’ to the differential equation that is governing the Universe. Remember that, a diff eq, is just an equation that is composed of derivatives. A derivative, in its most simplistic form, is just a rate of change. A rate of change, is just a ratio: a number. The solution to a diff eq is a function that generates those numbers. The function perfectly determines the relationship between the derivatives in the equation. If the solution is a sine wave, then you know that the derivatives are cycling in time.

      This powerful tool, allows you to visualize some very unique things, that we wouldn’t have realized otherwise. While, I am not absolutely certain, I believe that the ‘Solution To the Diff. Eq. of Life, is a geometric fractal solution. With this ‘Diff Eq (Theory of Everything)’ it should mirror the world of fractal geometry, because every form in the world, is a fractal. So, the solution to this TOE, is most certainly going to be a fractal geometry.

      The Fractal Human

      A couple of small observations about fractals might be necessary. Fractals are ‘copies of copies of copies…’. All forms of life, are copies of copies of copies. So using that knowledge, we can safely infer some rules. Fractals are resolved through an iterative growth process. In order for a baby human to become an adult, they must repeat the same instructions on a daily basis. If you repeat these instructions (effectively an iteration), then you ‘grow up’. The longer you grow, the more you become your ‘final form.’

      In this regard, we operate just like a fractal, even our personalities. The longer we iterate the more we ‘grow into our recipe’. When they say, you are what you eat, this is much closer to literal fact, than fantasy. It is through our iterative processes, that a human graduates from a baby, into adulthood. If we truly want to make a great human, we need to observe, and understand these rules. We need to feed ourselves, the best food. We need to drink, the best water. We need to bathe, daily, in the best sunshine. And we need to breathe quality air. If all the growth process happen are well managed, and operate in an ideal way (not too much, and not too little), then the final form of a human is a perfect geometrical object, that contains the Golden Ratio. That is not a coincidence.

      The Golden Ratio appears in the human body, because we are fractals. All we have to do, to generate peace and abolish war, is to make certain that each human alive, is a quality human. We don’t need more humans than what we have. In fact, we really need less humans. With smaller populations of humans, we can focus on creating better, higher quality humans. We cannot achieve this goal with overpopulation, because it is too easy to lose focus. When a population gets too big, it loses coherence. What was once a huge homogeneous structure, cracks away and falls apart into its core constituents.

      We need to reduce the human population by a factor of 10x before we can seriously implement a ‘training’ or ‘education’ process that will allow each human to realize their full potential. There would probably be between 20-30 years of continuous education, before these human participants, can be considered to be fully autonomous, and intelligent operators. Obviously, this is a future, that may never be realized by humanity.

      But, personally, that’s okay for me. I kind of assumed that, at an early age. What I really hope, is that in my next life, I will be reincarnated on a planet far away, and unlike Earth. I can only hope that the people that populate this far out world, are more enlightened. I guess, we just have to toss that dice, and hope for the best.

      Reply
      • joe

        This is a very, very rough draft of the Neo-Bible. It is nowhere near finished, and hardly presentable, but I would like to post it anyway, because people might not believe me.

        NEO-BIBLE
        Science and Spirituality

        OUR MOTIVATION

        I’m writing the Neo-Bible because there is a void. Nothing being produced commercially actually teaches you anything truly worth knowing, and when it does, it only makes one or two fine points. The Neo-Bible is obviously a reflection of my mind, and it will be very long and detailed, and have a lot of different subjects. It will touch on every subject that I think is a priority. Racism, sexism, sexual repression, and examine the sources and causes of these problems, in the hopes of helping humanity move beyond those essential problems which divide us, and keep us from seeing our true humanity. The motivation for the Neo-Bible is probably the most pure force in the universe. It is going to be a contemporary source of ultimate universal truth, specifically designed to be spoken and remembered for generations after it is published. So it, won’t sound like a Bible, it’s not going to be hard to interpret. It will sound like scripture, but it will have language for the ‘average person’…I am not going to make it to appeal to snobs.

        Here’s what’s happening. Yes, humanity is being ‘woke’ right now. But, what is it ‘awakening’ from? It is awakening from the OPPRESSIVE THINKING OF RELIGION ITSELF.

        Think about that. That’s huge, that means, that religion no longer carries the ‘weight’ that it once did. People are finally realizing that ‘religion’ itself is not the answer. You cannot use religion or ‘God’ as a ‘solution’ for anything, actually. In fact, religion only serves to confuse you. It keeps you from understanding your self, and it invests your time and energy in something external to you, that cannot provide the answers to the fundamental questions of life. The only thing in modern society, that can REPLACE religion, is scientific thinking itself. That is, the application of scientific thought to the non-physical realm. For if we have so much success with science in the physical world, then why couldn’t we also apply it to the metaphysical? We can. That is what my ‘book’ is going to be about. It will take the essential elements of the screeds on FB, and elaborate on them. Give them a framework, so that it becomes polished and golden. In this way, I hope to soon finish a new bible, with the working title, “The Science Bible.”

        The reason why I tell people out-rightly, “GOD DOES NOT EXIST” is because it is the truth. Protecting you from the truth is not good, despite what many people have told you your entire life. Actually, telling you LIES is what is NOT GOOD…so think about all the times the people in your life have lied to you? Do you think of ANY of those lies as being good? Where you happy when you found out Santa was not real? The Easter Bunny? All the shit you grew up with? God itself?

        No, you get quite upset, don’t you? You get so upset, you don’t even WANT TO BELIEVE THE TRUTH anymore. That is the saddest part of all.

        CARRYING CAPACITY OF EARTH

        Here’s how you can ‘prove’ that the endless pursuit of money will never make you happy. Unless you are the richest person in the world, there will always be somebody richer than you. So, basically, if the Theory of Money=Happiness were to be true, than there could only ever be one person in the world who has happy. Obviously, this is not the case. Thus, you have the proof, that money does not create happiness.

        Now, people will argue, it’s not money per se, it’s rather what money can buy you. But, think about this for a second. Do you have to buy everything? Couldn’t you trade work for goods directly, or barter? Yes, you could. There is no reason to suggest that you could not run, at least, small scale societies without money. Of course, this becomes difficult when you scale up. But, do we need to scale up? Do we need that many humans? At the end of the day, we don’t. There is a carrying capacity to Earth, and when human population declines, as it inevitably will, we will realize what this number truly is. Personally, I think it’s somewhere in the millions. For humans to co-exist peacefully we need, possibly 100 acres or more per human, considering that we have about a 1 billion farmable acres currently, you divide 1 billion/100 = 10 million. So, a safe assumption, is that the carrying capacity of planet Earth is 10 million people. We currently have 7.6 billion. Yes, that means, approximately 7.590 billion have to die. Obviously, not all at once. But, for human civilization to exist and prosper we need space, and resources to live sustainable. You need to spread your ‘energy load’ upon a wide swath of land. 100 acres may not be enough, it’s just a easy number. You may need a 1000 acres to truly live sustainably. Obviously, technology will help us out here, we can actually farm that kind of land with a small family today. So, we already have the farmers of the future. We just have to get over our fear of death. Remember, all 7.595 billion people are going to die anyway, wouldn’t you rather die, knowing you can be reincarnated as one of the 10 million people living a sustainable lifestyle on Earth, than to know we would be extinct? Technically, you can get to another ‘Universe’…so I’m not totally sure our spirit would be snuffed….but that’s going to be difficult for me to ever out-rightly prove. There is some evidence that information is preserved in a multi-verse, suggesting that spiritual ‘teleportation’ (meaning non-physical entities would be able of transference, remember the essential thermodynamic principle that energy is neither created or destroyed.) I would happily surrender my life right now, if I thought it would help people. And that is why I sacrifice, that is why I am writing the NB.

        We are all born a sink of energy, that is, we take and take and take, until one day we have had enough taking, and we start to give back. When we turn from sink to source, that is when we blossom. When our ability to give becomes paramount to our lives, that is when we become a true source of energy, and enlightenment. The goal is to be this person, not only with those you deeply love, but with those you don’t even know.

        Every day, our essential purpose, is to feed ourselves, food, water, sunshine, and PURPOSE….we have to go out, into the world, and GATHER THESE THINGS, and use them to create the life we want to have. If we want peace, we have to make peace. There is nothing, but the eternal fight, to create a world, that is essentially, UNNATURAL. We are fighting the chaos of the Universe itself, that is why we NEED to know our enemy, we need to know the TRUE sources of our ultimate demise. Without truth, we will tumble into the rabbit hole of false hopes, and false dreams. Truth is the only way forward.

        there is NO ONE SOURCE FOR TRUTH…people always have an AGENDA! That is why you get an education, and you LEARN THE TRUTH FOR YOURSELF!!!
        There are NO GOOD GUYS, and there are NO BAD GUYS….there are only billions of people IN IT FOR THEMSELVES.

        I remember, when I was a teen, what frustrated me the most, was my ‘obsessive’ thinking. That is. I literally repeated phrases continuously in my head, ad nauseum. It took a long time, to ‘overcome’ that thought process. To not just ‘repeat what I had heard’…but to come up with my own thoughts. I think this is because of TV commercialism. The more you watch TV, the more this bizarre OCD thought process happens. It is actually DESTROYING OUR CULTURE, because we can no longer separate truth from fiction. We have such difficulty because we fail to see that when we watch TV we are watching fiction, and we ‘choose’ to watch fiction, more than we ‘choose’ to watch reality…I put that in quotes, because how much ‘choice’ do we have anymore, with all our devices? The fact is, this is a construct CREATED BY CORPORATIONS to literally CONTROL YOUR MIND…and it works. It works splendidly with those that are innocent and young, and do not have a good education. I really feel for the younger ones out there. You really have to read books, get outside of TV and media, and SEE THE WORLD for yourselves.

        I’ve purposefully gone without glasses for a long time. It’s nice, because everybody looks nicer. When I put on glasses (say for driving), I realize everybody has evil looks on their faces. I have no idea what everybody is so upset about, but I honestly feel fine, so I go without glasses as much as possible. I would say I’m projecting my emotions, but
        I know it’s a typical American thing. I think people are too busy to talk to anybody anymore, and they just rush around ‘keeping busy’ to keep from actually facing their real problems. That’s why everybody looks so upset all the time in America. Of course, if you ‘look rich’ or like a ‘celebrity’ you already have instant social approval (because everybody wants to live vicariously through rich and famous people.) You can be the same asshole, but get a Ferrari, and everybody pretends to be your friend. Pretty self-serving if you ask me. If people only want to be your friend, to get something out of it, then they don’t really want to be your friend do they?

        Please, be aware, that we ALL use our predatory instincts on a daily basis, for our survival. Every woman does this too. So while, it’s good to acknowledge this behavior, and it’s limitations, you must also understand that it is ALWAYS GOING TO EXIST. It is part of the human animal. The quicker you confront your instinctual nature, and accept it, and direct it for useful purposes, the quicker you will succeed in life.

        Why should I listen to you? You’re not rich and successful? But, if I was rich and successful, then I would have sacrificed all my morality, so I would have NOTHING TO SAY, WORTH SAYING. See how that works?

        While one part of me sees us as all connected, I know that I am the exception and not the rule. The fact is, people need to learn a lot of things to understand what I understand, and far too many people just don’t care. They want life handed to them on a platter. I think the fighters are few and far between. Maybe, it’s true. Maybe we just have too many ‘useless eaters’ on Earth. There comes a time, when we must acknowledge, there are too many humans on Earth, and we have to ‘cull’ the population to enable our future. Like lemmings, we must BRAVELY MARCH TOWARD THAT CLIFF. We cannot stop. We must sacrifice our lives for the greater good. That is why I write all this shit, because I won’t be here forever, but hopefully I can leave some knowledge that will remain after my death. I would happily volunteer to sacrifice my life, for the next generation.

        The fact is, that this intelligence won’t be ANYWHERE NEAR WHAT A HUMAN INTELLIGENCE is like. Humans revolve around their emotions, not their programming. Thus, a machine intelligence (without emotions) will never be ANYTHING LIKE A HUMAN INTELLIGENCE. FYI. It will be entirely different and much more scary. It’s like what would you rather have, a ‘Buddha’ or a ‘Sociopath’…they are both intelligent, but one is dedicated to helping humanity, the other is dedicated to taking advantage of it. You can clearly see, as the A.I. evolves, it’s main purpose is to TAKE ADVANTAGE of humans AND MAKE THE RICH EVEN RICHER…that is what all this ‘tech’ has done. Not a single piece of ‘tech’ that has been invented in America in the past 20 years is actually HELPING ANYBODY ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING…it’s a completely selfish technology. The purpose of all the technology is to accumulate MORE WEALTH…and that’s precisely what it has done. Technology has concentrated wealth, not liberated it, and it will only continue to do so. That is why the the future is ‘dystopian’….because the end result of our technological future is a moonscape, a world devoid of life, laughter, and meaning.

        The greatest problem Americans have is their inability to simply enjoy their lives. We are always under this tremendous pressure to succeed, and we simply have no idea why. We are driven, but we don’t know to what purpose. As an engineer, I was finally able to gain some perspective on this ‘creation’ process, but it has been very difficult and a road fraught with despair. I think finally, I have seen a way to both push my intellect, and enjoy my time, but the only way to do that is to go at your own pace. Don’t let people push and pull you in a direction you don’t want to go. Be stubborn, be resilient. If you really WANT TO DO SOMETHING, then just do it…yet, if you find yourself ‘stuck on repeat’…you need to look deeply at your motivation, because what you are doing, may just be something to keep you occupied, to keep you distracted from your true purpose in life: to understand your motivation.

        In America today, there are two kinds of citizens: corporations, and people. They are not equivalent. America is centered around promoting it’s corporations, but subjugating the people.

        The disingenuous part, is that corporation ACT like they actually care about people. They produce so much propaganda, that the weak and the innocent actually TRUST the corporations. Of course, this is their ploy. If they get you to trust them, then you will share your information willingly. The problem is that they absolutely couldn’t care less about their customers. They are there to be gamed. You do not get any special privileges when you buy something. You are just another sucker, another stooge to be gamed. At least when you hang out with people, they are fairly honest, if they care about you it’s obvious, if they don’t give a fuck, that’s obvious too. Most people don’t act like corporations, they don’t usually LIE TO YOUR FUCKING FACE, and smile while doing it.

        Being a cynic has it’s benefits, when the world finally descends into lies and chaos (as it is now)…at least us cynics saw it coming. You can’t understand how good it feels. I think it’s the only way to actually ENJOY these chaotic events. I had envisioned this shit happening 20 years ago, and I always wondered what the fuck was taking so long.

        Man, I ALWAYS THOUGHT AMERICA WAS RACIST AS FUCK…maybe I didn’t really want to believe it, but I ALWAYS THOUGHT IT WAS…and now WE KNOW THAT IT IS…do you know how much better that is??? That was a huge deal with the white supremacists kept behind closed doors. Now, that they are emboldened, it’s even better, now we have TARGETS!

        I was actually one of these stupid fucks that wanted to serve my country once (what a mistake that would’ve been, knowing how many racists there are in government)…but NOW I KNOW BETTER…never serve anybody but your family or your self. All else is UTTER BULLSHIT….utter propaganda made to brainwash you into doing somebody else’s dirty work. Even all the racists, their just pawns in a rich man’s game. They are to be used, to defend a ’cause’ they don’t even understand. At least, I know my motivation. And I will take that understanding with me to my grave. There is no going back.

        Think about it, for just one second. Imagine, if we swapped the budgets of NASA, and the DOD…just imagine. 500 Billion for NASA….and 5 Billion for the DOD…we would probably be SAFER because we wouldn’t even have enemies, we would have mutual cooperation around the world, because we would have no other choice.
        What we sacrifice for war (we would still have more than enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world over,) we can invest in our society. Imagine where we would be since the Space Race of the 1970’s….500 billion x 40 years = 20 trillion dollars in space technology. That would mean we could colonize, not only Mars itself, but possibly the entire Solar System.
        Think about that. Think about what we have sacrificed in real terms in order to have weapons of war. We sacrificed our entire future, our entire way of life…and we will be left with nothing but the increased means to kill more humans. Why are we addicted to killing humans? Why do we spend so much money dropping bombs and killing people? What is our problem?

        Maybe they are right, maybe in the short run, there are some ‘brilliant people’…but if all those ‘brilliant people’ use their intelligence to take advantage of the innocent, and make the rich even richer, then what is the end result? The society we have today. A country NOBODY but the RICHEST wants to participate in. Think about it. The only people that really like the game, are the people at the top of it, the benefactors. The 99% are getting screwed, yet, we are the ones that are ENABLING them. I don’t understand why we all participate in our own demise.

        If I could have it my way, ANY PERSON THAT CHOSE TO BE SINGLE would have a ‘society pool’ of potential dates (actually encouraged by the government). That way we would all have dates, once or twice a month, with NEW people, and we could have sex with those people, without any emotional attachments. If the sex is good, and we enjoy each other’s company, then we proceed to relationship mode. The way we have it now, is totally backwards. Women aren’t as horny, so they ‘withhold sex’ as long as possible. Men are horny, and they want sex as soon as possible. Both are stubborn and unwilling to ‘engage’….so what happens? Men end up alone, and women end up alone, and they both end up frustrated. Is this where society is heading? A bunch of Americans, single, sexually frustrated and taking it out on rubber sex dolls because they can’t be with a real human? That’s not a future I’m looking forward to. The point is, NO MATTER HOW MUCH RUBBER SEX DOLL GIVES YOU ‘PLEASURE’…it will NEVER REPLACE THE REAL THING…we have such underlying sexual frustration in society, that it probably causes a rash of strange behaviors that are being outed today. Sometimes, I understand how it feels, being a man in America, is like being in denial of your instinct. You are supposed to pretend that women aren’t attractive, that you don’t like them. And women do the same to you (especially when they ARE attracted to you)…so you have two people with a natural attraction for each other…a mad passionate attraction that cannot be denied, and yet we sit there in a room denying each other. This is so pointless. I really HATE THIS ASPECT OF SOCIETY…I wish we could go back 2000 years, and if we liked each other, we would just make eye contact, and sneak out back and start kissing…I have NO IDEA, why society encourages sex to be so fucking difficult. Why do they repress our natural instincts? Who do they think they are benefiting? It’s probably some holdover from Christianity that makes utterly no sense. Just another way of shaming people into hating themselves. Just another reason to ban religion.

        I think progress is, having sex with anybody you are attracted to, at least once. I’ve actually had GFs express this desire to me. I had a GF say to me, “I think about sleeping with every guy I meet.” And I totally believed her, (of course, she had pretty low self-esteem, and was looking for ‘approval’) and I let her go on her merry little way, no strings attached. I’m not going to tell you what you want to do with your body. The fact is, if a woman wants to have sex with men, she shouldn’t feel ashamed to do it. Sex makes the world a BETTER PLACE, and the more we do it, the LESS LIKELY we are to act out violently. So, which would you rather have: World War, or World Sex?

        At the end of the day, we think it’s such a big deal for a penis to go in a vagina….why? Why is it such a big deal?

        The reality is, IT’S NOT! The more you do it, the more you realize, it’s NOT A BIG DEAL…to have sex with ANYBODY…you don’t ‘possess’ a person because they want to have sex with you, you get nothing ‘special’ but a moment of passion. I have no idea, why we pretend that this ‘moment’ is such a bigger deal than all the other moments in our lives. Why is ‘sex’ supposedly ‘shameful’…and yet, violent behavior encouraged? We have our PRIORITIES ALL FUCKED UP.

        Maybe, what’s really happening, is that women are coming to terms with the power of their sexuality. Women must acknowledge, that they universally have something that men want: access to their bodies.

        Yet, the problem seems to reside in the abuse of this power. Far too many women, are content with flaunting their sexuality and have no empathy for the power they posses. It is the same situation with an ‘alpha male’….that man has something that women want…power, wealth, and fame…thus the ‘alpha male’ and the ‘beautiful woman’ are in a natural state of battle. They both have something that the other wants, and they are not afraid to use it against their ‘enemy’.

        This is a very unnatural state of affairs, and that’s why we are seeing all the problems in society. The fact is, humans are not evolved, and have not evolved to live in civilizations. Women shouldn’t feel like they have to use their beauty to succeed in life, and men shouldn’t feel compelled to abuse their power. These are all problems that are inherent to a society and a civilization. On a tribal level, I don’t think these problems would ever exist. Thus, our humanity is evolved to a tribal level, not a societal one, and that is why we have always been living a fantasy, there is no possibility that our current model of civilization can succeed when on a daily basis we ignore our most basic and fundamental instincts. That is, the longer we force ourselves to live this way, the more likely it will fall apart. You can see over time, that society itself has been forced to evolve from a ‘moral certitude’ to one that capitalizes off of sex for entertainment (not that long ago pornography was a crime.)

        I have to say, I’ve never understood the pleasure of the ‘strip club’.

        That is, I’ve never actually LIKED being teased by women. I was always turned off by those ‘ladies’. The fact is, just meeting a woman, that is nice, and even remotely cute is MORE THAN ENOUGH OF A TEASE…9/10 of these women want nothing to do with you. And that 1/10 exception has a horribly long list of ‘criteria’ that you must meet before she will accept you into her life. The only times I got laid, was when I was young, and the girls just wanted to be with a ‘cute boy’….that’s when I got laid a lot. But, sometime after her mid-twenties, women seem to be completely uninterested in casual sex, and only want a long-term relationship, and that is when you see the ‘list’ come out. Now, I’ve dated a few older women, but I’ve always realized, that unless we ‘grew together’ we would just grow apart. And, because older women are already ‘formed’ they are hesitant to connect, they actually don’t want to be emotionally vulnerable, a lot of women are afraid to fall in love. So, guess what? They don’t. They look for shallow relationships with men they aren’t attracted to. These are relationships they can more easily ‘control’ their emotions with. Therefore, women don’t like to be teased. They don’t like to be in relationships they can’t control, and that is why they enjoy ‘stringing men along’…in fact, many women make careers out of it….ala….the strip club scene.

        It’s funny, but in the end, both women AND men HATE being treated the exact same way. Both seek control over their sexual desire….which is, essentially impossible to control. It’s that human ideal, of controlling what we can’t. We are always obsessed with that which we simply cannot do. It’s the essential irony of life itself.

        have you noticed, that ‘one person is never enough?’…that is, you must attract A CROWD, not just an individual…you must be THE CENTER OF ATTENTION…it is not enough to merely exist. This is as much an addiction to power and control, as any sick Weinstein has. And, it results in the same type of internal decay….it makes you constantly have to improve yourself, your looks, and your dress…constantly have to buy new things and add new ‘features’ to make yourself attractive, it is never enough to just be yourself. In fact, you don’t even know HOW to be yourself anymore, you have done it for so long, you have become what you most feared: a soulless being. Living without emotion, without love, and always needing something external, always needing something to fill the void that exists within.

        And, I’m not saying this because I’m the exception, I have lived it too…I have lived in vain before: a life of vanity…but I did not let it get the best of me, but rather I saw it change and hurt the ones I loved. They chased a phantom, the ideal of beauty, always un-achievable, and leaving you forever unable to measure up. Chasing this dream you always left behind the only people that really mattered. As always, these people end up hurting those they love the most, to seek the approval of those they don’t even know.

        The greatest mistake that people often make, is believing that there is a ‘source of good’ out there. My mom does this all the time. She tells me, “I just believe, that people want to do good.” And, I can see how that makes her sleep better at night. But, she should come to terms with the fact, that this is NOT TRUE….only a small subset of humans are evolved enough, or educated enough to see the forest for the trees. There are only a small population of people that truly understand the Real World, and how it functions. Thus, it is not enough to ‘assume’ that all will be well in the world, you MUST actually follow through with your intent. You MUST make the world a better place, it is not enough to assume that it will become one. History has proven time and again, that collectively mankind acts like a child. It is our mistake, to assume that our individual enlightenment extends to the rest of us. The world is not that simple.

        Trust me, I WANT TO BE WRONG ON THIS ONE…and hopefully I am, but I sincerely doubt it. The reality is that progress has been agonizingly slow. It has been largely impeded by religion and it’s associated dogma. Even some of our most intelligent media personalities, are unable to think for themselves, and this has a knock on effect on the children (I’m talking about you, Stephen.) Children are utterly confused when the guy on TV says one thing, and their parents say another. They really don’t know who to believe, and it will be dozens of years before they figure it out for themselves. For now, we have to assume, that the youth are too impressionable, and as such, are the unwitting victims of whatever the ‘older generation’ says or does. Thus, you can’t depend on the ‘youth’ to save us, if you what you teach them is utter bullshit. This is how I know the future will not get any better, because we are depending on a whole bunch of ’empty vessels’….it’s a false hope.

        C’mon…use your brains, people. The reason they tell you look ‘inward’ is because most of us don’t. We ignore our true feelings to make other people happy. We are pressured to be friendly, to immediately ‘greet people’ we don’t even know. We are lambasted if we ‘don’t have a smile on our face’. We will try to be ‘friendly’ even if we feel like crap. The fact is, we sacrifice ourselves because we are told to. We are told to be ‘polite to strangers’…but then, as I experience on FB everyday, they do nothing but insult you. What do I get out of my interactions with people, if all they feel comfortable doing is producing an insult? Why should I sacrifice my integrity, my self-respect, for this ethereal search for somebody who simply doesn’t care about my personal growth?

        That is why you look inward. You look inward, because when you become the source of love and happiness in your life, nobody can take it away from you. You have to have it first, you cannot expect someone to give it to you.

        But, once you achieve this ‘inner peace’, you’re right, you’re supposed to ‘engage’ the world, you turn from sink into a source. You begin to help other people. Of course, you cannot help people, until you have done the necessary healing yourself. So, in the end, there is a path, that you need to naturally follow. A path of least resistance. Help yourself, and when that’s accomplished you can help other people.

        Additionally, the knowledge of yourself, is what you depend on for empathy. For if you don’t understand the true source of your emotions, you cannot understand the behavior of others. This what they really mean, when they tell you to ‘look inward.’

        Honestly, NYT…I shouldn’t have to ‘splain this to you.

        Not to mention, what happens when those ‘other people’ turn on you (which has happened to me many times.) People that are victims of trauma and abuse, don’t often accept love in a healthy way. In fact, many of these people are very afraid to fall in love. They are afraid of the vulnerability that comes with being in love with somebody. So you can spend all your time, and effort helping, and loving a woman, and at the end of the day, she can still walk out on you and into the arms of an abusive person. What do you do then? You invested your life, your self-respect into another, and what did they do, they consumed you and left you to die, alone, with nothing. They even happily taunt you, to make you feel worse about yourself. Yes, this has all happened to me in real life. And I have to say, if I didn’t ‘turn inward’ and find my true source of happiness within myself, I wouldn’t even be here today, typing this screed out to you. I would’ve died, with a needle in my arm, after trying to commit suicide for the umpteenth time. So, sorry NYT…don’t tell me that I ‘need’ other people…because as far as ‘other people’ are concerned, I shouldn’t even be alive.

        I mean, not even thinking about me…think about all the women that were abused, raped, and tortured. Think about the innocent lives wasted because that person put all their ‘happiness’ into another person. A person, that obviously, was not worth investing their time, energy, and happiness into. So, it’s very irresponsible to write this meaningless article. I often wonder, what is the TRUE AGENDA at the NYT…sometimes, you publish enlightening works of true inspiration, and then you publish this crap. FYI, stick to the good stuff. You don’t have to come out with 10 meaningless op-ed pieces every day. Especially when you don’t even truly understand your personal motivation. Sounds to me, like the NYT needs some therapy.

        Just another quick addendum. I’ve been self-publishing on FB for many years now. I’ve been trying to write self-less screeds in my fruitless attempt at trying to help every single person in the world achieve enlightenment. I am a Bodhisattva. My purpose, is to forgo Nirvana, in order to enable other people see ‘the big picture’. I could have left the Earth, but it was not my time. I was given this assignment, to help other people. But, I could never get to this place, unless I was alone. The process is the process of self-discovery. You simply cannot ‘self-discover’ in a group setting. You have to be willing to be alone. It’s easier said than done. In fact, I find far more people afraid of being alone, than of having company. I think more people need to seek wisdom within, than they need to seek it without. The fact is, even if you are enlightened, people are not very nice to you. People in America, are far more likely to go to war, than to be your friend. You need immense strength, to move past this hostility, and you need to be strong within yourself, to not take the insult, but to deflect it, and question that person about their true motivation. Other people are often a ‘mess’ that you have to fix…because, ‘other people’ are unlikely to have done the work, the psychoanalysis, the self-help…you simply cannot depend on ‘other people’ for much of anything. If you get something from ‘other people’ it is a gift, not a guarantee.

        It’s going to use all my mathematical genius, all my literary genius (merging the right/left brain hemispheres)…and it will incorporate a completely holistic vision, a top-down approach to life…in this way, it won’t just be an ‘updated Bible’…but a completely new approach to understand the Universe. I will use mathematics, and metaphor to explain every single natural phenomenon. The language of fractals, chaos theory, determinism, and feedback mechanisms will be merged with metaphor, passion, and a lust for language. This won’t just be a didactic lecture from a boring academic, but rather a passionate form of art from a modern genius. The words themselves will sing and rhyme, and every last word will resonate within you, because each individual phrase will be formed from penultimate truth. This will not be an exercise in ego, but rather, motivated by the absolute purest of aspirations. The book will be made by the essential ideal, that we all have the desire to leave the world with something greater than I we were given.

        “And according to research, if we want to be happy, we should really be aiming to spend less time alone”
        This is the STUPIDEST STATEMENT I HAVE EVER READ….it’s like assuming everybody is a GREAT PERSON, they’ve never been abused, and they always say and do the right thing…I don’t know what goody two shoes planet the writer is living on, but have you stepped out of your house recently? The world is not a ‘nice place’.
        And that’s exactly my point, what if all the people you know are are jerks and assholes…you should force yourself to spend time with them, just so you won’t be alone? Y’know not everybody has a crop of ‘completely selfless friends’ that always support you and never say anything negative, never insult you, and never make you feel like you don’t ‘measure up.’ IDK, maybe it’s just me, but even my ‘so-called friends’ are always ‘competing’ with me in some way. Maybe I just got dealt a bad hand, and somehow bring the jealousy and spite out of other people…but I don’t think I’m alone. This article is just pretending that everybody is out to help YOU, but most people are out to help themselves. The writer, seems to completely forget the kind of ‘friend’ that is in the White House.
        Trust me, I would rather BE ALONE ON AN ISLAND FOR A THOUSAND YEARS, than be forced to spend one day trying to get along with Trump.

        Here’s what I think is the essentially WRONG part of this article. It’s essentially saying that you should aspire to the same degree of social life YOUR ENTIRE LIFE, regardless of your personality, regardless of your age, regardless of your extenuating circumstances (what if you happened to have a job, in a remote location, and there isn’t anybody around?? What, do you just ‘sulk’ all day???)

        The essential point, is that when you are young, you are dumb and innocent, and making friends is EXCEPTIONALLY EASY…and yes, I think every young person should be encouraged to be social. It’s a natural part of life, and you should absolutely know how to talk to people and make friends. And for a long time, if you enjoy your social life, it will be the primary source of happiness. But, here’s where things get complicated. After you turn 30, you feel kinda stupid ‘getting high’ and ‘hanging out’…that is, there is a natural age at which this behavior seems immature. There is also a natural tendency to discover your ‘true self’ during your mid-life. That is, the person that you suppressed to ‘get along’ with other people, starts to come out. All that ‘geeky’ stuff that you were embarrassed to do, but enjoyed doing, you just start DOING IT…you realize, that you don’t really care that much what people think of you, unless you really LIKE that person. That means, you DON’T MAKE FRIENDS AS EASILY AS YOU DID IN THE PAST….and this makes sense, because from 30 and beyond, you start to develop A REAL PERSONALITY…and when you are around people that you don’t get along with, you basically are no longer able to ‘tolerate’ that behavior. That is, one I was a teen, I could hang out with people that were assholes, and it wasn’t such a big deal. But, now that I’m much older, why would I spend time with somebody I consider to be an asshole? I don’t go to parties every weekend anymore. I don’t need their approval anymore, just to get ‘free drugs’ or whatever I wanted when I was teen and didn’t have anything.

        And I have to say, this is a NATURAL PART OF GETTING OLDER….nobody has the social life they had when they were a teen, it feels unnatural…you can’t get pissed drunk and shitty and scream every weekend of your life. There comes a time, when you move on. So, this article needs a more nuanced message. It should say, hey make friends when you’re young, but make peace when you’re older. That’s the true way to be happy.

        Also, when you’re young, you want like what ‘as many friends as possible’…and when you’re older, you realize, you don’t even like all these people…you naturally narrow down the list, to the people that you have the most in common with. If you ‘grew up’ in a similar way, then you might be able to stay friends for a long period. But, if you don’t grow ‘together’ then you have to go your own way.

        And you should NEVER be afraid to sacrifice a friend for personal growth. You should NEVER let another person hold you back. If that person doesn’t want to grow with you, you need to have the courage to go your separate ways. It’s very bad to cling to somebody, especially when you have low self-esteem. When people detect desperation, they usually turn mean. I had a friend, that reveled in abusive behavior, because (of course, his father abused him)…he just didn’t know any better, and the longer I was friends with him, the more ‘abusive’ he got, because he falsely assumed, that I didn’t have the courage to never be his friend again. But, I did.

        This article also does not distinguish between types of relationships. Why do you need more ‘shallow friends’? If anything, I’ve always wished for friends that were more like me. People that wanted to talk about things. I’ve always been attracted to females that write, but I have to be honest, I’ve never actually met any of these women (although I do know they exist.) But, where I live, there just isn’t this wonderful assortment of companions to choose from. I’m really limited in what’s available. So, honestly, I don’t worry about it, because it’s the least controllable aspect of my life. It’s nearly impossible to make meaningful relationship with somebody because when you’re in your middle age, these things are 100x more complicated than when you were 20 y/o. I think the biggest mistake that people make, is sacrificing their youth to ‘get ahead’…and then they have a mid-life crisis, and they are suddenly trying to act like teenagers again (trying to make up for lost time.) But, it’s impossible. The dynamic of HS and College basically force you to socialize, so you must not sacrifice your social life at this critical time. In fact, I didn’t even start college seriously until I turned 25…and within a few years, I was totally burnt out on college parties. I hated the girls (they were all miserably shallow)…and I remember distinctly, I wasn’t having any fun at parties anymore. Nobody talked about anything interesting (this was the peak stupid ‘Paris Hilton’ days)…absolutely nobody was ‘woke’ back then. Everybody worshiped wealth and fame (this was pre-GFC)…and to be honest, I NEVER fit in with those people. I just went to parties to flirt with girls, but I never seriously wanted to be with any of them. I would just flirt with a girl, until I knew she was attracted, and then I would lose interest…because, fundamentally, there was NO CONNECTION. I just don’t think people should feel force to ‘make friends’ with ‘popular people’ just to fit in…because sooner or later, you will realize, you don’t even want their approval, these aren’t the type of people that you care about.

        I don’t believe humans can live naturally in cities. I believe that all major large metropolitan areas are going to be the first to turn into complete chaos in a ‘neo-world’ scenario. It may just be my anxiety, but I also feel like I grew up in cities like Chicago and San Diego, and I have no attraction to them. I abhor cities now (although, for a city SD, is pretty nice.) and I simply prefer not to live in a major metro area.
        The tension, the stress, and the frustration are never worth it to me. Unless you’re living at the top of the heap (i.e. rich as fuck) cities are deplorable. I think all the people that live in these places are in complete denial. Unless you’re at the top of the heap, unless you are getting some awesome social life (which I doubt most people are) why would you sacrifice yourself to live in a metro area? I dunno, it’s just not for me. I just see chaos happening, when I think about the future. I don’t even want to be there to see it.
        Y’all can do whatever you want, but just remember, you were clearly warned.
        The best thing you can do for yourself, is explore the world when you are young, and curious and have the energy…but pay attention closely to the people you encounter. Notice how they treat you, what they say, what they do. When you have something that they want, the will quickly reveal themselves….if you have nothing they want, then you will notice that quickly too. You have to ask yourself, what is this person’s motivation? When you examine that, you start to see, people are very selfish, they aren’t your friend, and they are almost always competing with you. If you meet somebody that is just laid back, and nice to hang out with, hang onto that person for dear life, they are the exception to the rule. Make friends with the exceptions, and ignore the rest.

        What I can see, as the most prevalent problem in America, is that people seem to truly believe that there are ‘good’ and ‘bad’ people. They actually believe that ‘good’ people dress nice, have nice clothes, and cars, and all these material things, and that if you have all these useless things, you must be ‘one of the good guys.’
        Of course, this is precisely the opposite. The people that are willing to sacrifice their humanity in the pursuit of wealth, money and fame, are always the most lost. It doesn’t mean they are ‘evil’ but they are far from ‘good’.
        I hope people realize, that all good things are done with moderation, even being a ‘good’ person. When you realize, it’s better to be ‘neutral’…than to have a false idea of being ‘good’ or ‘bad’…then you will realize that being ‘good’ is something you do in the moment, and being ‘bad’ is the same way. You need to be capable of understanding when the situation requires you to be tough, and when it requires you to be kind. To pretend that you can stay in ‘one state’ all your life is a delusion. I hope you can see that before you die.

        ON BALANCE

        It’s kind of a strange analogy, but what’s important to realize is that the underlying mechanism is the same. That is, you can be intelligent in different ways, in different capacities. You don’t have to know math to be intelligent, you don’t have to know physics, and science. You can be very intelligent and just be a literary person. But, you do get something VERY SPECIAL when you learn mathematics, physics and science, AND literature, and film. You get to ‘connect your two hemispheres’…and thus, you get to provide your mind with the essential balance to be a whole being. I’m one of the rare people that knew this, and have essentially cultivated this nature. It allows me to see ‘the big picture’ much more easily than people who are either ‘technical’ or ‘artistic’….I indulge both, obviously. I make a lot of technical art, but at the end of the day, it’s still art. When I build something, it is mostly engineering, but there is also a certain degree of creativity, and the best mechanical designs always have an element of beauty to it. The best engineers already know this stuff, the Italians obviously know that.

        ON GHOSTS

        The thing about ‘ghosts’ that most people may not realize, is that you may actually be seeing something spiritually. That is, what you detect isn’t a physical entity but an energetic one. And, only a person that is sensitive to this energy will tap into it. I know, when I visited Cambodia and Vietnam I felt a ghostly presence nearly everywhere, but that’s because so many people have died in those countries, it only stands to reason, that we are able to tap into this ‘sensation’…and feel the presence of history.
        Also, I don’t think you can ‘see’ these things without being alive. It is a precondition to life and consciousness. That is, ghosts don’t really ‘exist’ in the scientific sense, but rather it’s a sensation that we feel when we know that there has been a tragic death. A type of sensitivity toward our ancestors is only to be expected, after all, we are intimately connected to all human life, it would only stand to make sense, that if we want to, we can tap into this ‘realm’ at any time.

        ON BEING WOKE

        I think this ‘so woke’ movement has a pretty logical cause. The underlying mechanism behind being ‘woke’ is communicating online. There is literally so much information, that if you are willing, you can get many more opinions than your own. In this way, we are becoming a ‘hive mind’…and the essential part of this mind, is that everybody is on the same page. The facts are essentially ‘shared’ between us, and in that way, we all agree to some basic principles. The reality, is that every day, our ‘awareness’ of these facts is expanding, like the ripples across a pond. Sounding out in time, enlightening all of those around us.
        I have great hope for humanity, in the long run, we will get there. But we can’t be greedy with our lives. We must share ourselves and our energy freely. That doesn’t mean you don’t hold people accountable for their actions, but rather, that you allow yourself to move beyond…and develop an inherent flexibility. That is, you must conform to the world around, and learn to swim with the tide. That is the only way to survive in certain conditions.

        ON DEATH

        The rise of ‘clickbait’ is so fundamentally human, it’s actually sad. The fact that we delight in ‘tricking’ people into doing something for financial gain is a horrible aspect of our society. The whole idea of being a con-artist is so linked to success that people always choose the con. We basically have to abolish money to abolish con artists. We CAN HAVE AMERICAN, without money. Obviously, there wouldn’t be many people around, but that’s fine. That means there will be more for everybody else. The fundamental problem with most humans is their inability to think beyond their immediate lifespan. You are IMMORTAL. You are a reincarnate being. Therefore, your body dies, but your energy is converted, transformed into something else. Most likely, a NEW LIFE. Of course, within my own horizon it is very difficult to prove this, you have to step outside your own mind (drugs help.) But it’s the same for everybody. I’m not saying your ‘personality’ is intact, because that is a byproduct of your physical life, but your essential life energy is transferred.

  33. Wagner_Fan

    This page is mainstream media garbage trying to pose as something bold. Acting like Joe Rogan and Ben Shapiro are “renegades.” And who actually reads Camille Paglia (whose top book is ranked #1,000,000 on Amazon) or listens to her babble on and on about the ’60s? You pick two YouTubers who are about as close to the mainstream media as you can get. And an outdated professor who is under the mistaken belief that liberals created the concept of free speech back in the ’60s. Have you ever heard of InfoWars? Now THAT’S where you find the real renegades.

    Reply
    • Max Rittmeister

      Exactly. The “classics” are missing. Sowell, Thiel, and (I know this will be controversial, but he is extremely critical of postmodernist bs) Chomsky

      Reply
  34. Max Rittmeister

    Eh, what about Peter Thiel? the Granddaddy of the I.D.W. He was 20 years ago where these people are today.

    Reply
  35. MG (@gtx132)

    I think you must add Glenn Loury (economics professor at Brown) and John McWhorter (Linguistics professor at Columbia) to the IDW.

    Reply
  36. Jim Sachs

    Love the idea, but find it depressing that intelligent people discussing important issues in a civilized manner must do so in a dark corner of the Web.

    Reply
  37. Phillip J

    Candace Owens
    Gavin Mcinnes
    Yiannis Varoufakis
    Dave Chappelle
    Jordan Maxwell

    Reply
  38. Jacqueline Heath

    From a European perspective, how about Tommy Robinson, Katie Hopkins, Marine Le Pen, Nigel Farage and Geert Wilders?

    Reply
  39. Evan

    Well, the first person to take all of these arrows in the back was Ken Wilber! He has pointed out every single one of these issues in his 25 books and was 30 years ahead of any of these people. He is the only one that has a model that explains it in a way you can teach anyone. I know that many of these “leaders” know of Wilber, Eric Weinstein said “some people call it a pre/ trans fallacy” only Ken Wilber called it a pre-trans fallacy and did so in in 1982!!! Yes, 1982. Peterson’s Competency Hierarchies sounds a lot like Wilber’s actualization Hierarchies. Wilber was putting up videos on YouTube criticizing Post Modernity in 2006! I know he is a recluse and struggles with a rare disease and mostly moves in Buddhist circles. NO! HE IS NOT NEW AGE! there, got that out the way. It’s kind of ironic that Peterson is so ‘sensitive’ with 2 years of name calling, when Wilber has been going through it since 1978!

    I would also nominate Roger Scruton who was way ahead of this crowd as well. Both of these people are still alive and working and could use some love.

    Reply
    • Marc

      And PLEASE ADD Jordan Peterson –This might be the greatest quote from him I’ve seen regarding the whole issue of how to navigate these days:

      “Be aware of the fact that the habits of the blue church don’t work anymore. Recognise that your way of making sense in the world that used to work doesn’t work and you need to set yourself free to begin learning anew.

      This by nature must in fact be exploratory – so learn to swim. Do not make sense prematurely, in spite of the fact the world feels dangerous – in spite of the fact you may want to protect yourself. Doing so too quickly will not allow your natural exploratory approach to do what it needs to do.

      “Get yourself into places where your consensus reality and your habits are wilfully destroyed and get as far away from ideology as you can. Your job is not to know what the fuck is going on. Your job is to be absolutely certain that you have no idea what the fuck is going on and learn how to feel from raw chaos, from raw uncertainty. Then and only then are you finally able to begin the journey of beginning to form a collective intelligence in this new environment.” –Jordan Peterson

      Reply
      • Tommy Sunshine

        Hey Marc, Jordan B Peterson is already included, the quote above that you have attributed to him was actually from Jordan Greenhall. This is from the Deep Code Assessment interview on Rebel Wisdom:

        ‘Jordan Greenhall wrote one of the most compelling and widely shared analyses of the political landscape in the wake of the Trump election – ‘Deep Code’ – about how the consensus mainstream media reality “Blue Church” was being disrupted by a new insurgent “Red Religion”. He believes the recent viral interview between Jordan Peterson and Cathy Newman on Channel 4 News was another example of the consensus reality breaking down – a “glitch in the matrix”. He talks to Rebel Wisdom’s David Fuller – who made the first documentary about Jordan Peterson AND used to work at Channel 4 News for many years.’

        Jordan Greenhall should unequivocally be added to the IDW.

    • Brian McDaniel

      Seconding Yaron Brook. A courageous fighter for free speech advocating science and reason. Has appeared with Dave Rubin and Sargon of Akkad. Posts videos several times a week.

      Reply
    • Jerry Hoehn

      Another vote for Yaron Brook; he was talking about this stuff before it was cool to talk about this stuff.

      Reply
  40. Maxwell

    Matt Dillahunty

    Matt is as close to the ideal of pure and honest logic about the world in which we live.

    Reply
    • Tracy

      Dillahunty is great in his area of expertise, which is to address religiosity and rationality. Outside of that, he is still stuck in progressive viewpoints. He may continue to evolve, and I think the desire is certainly there, to be an ‘intellectual’, but I think he still has work ahead.

      Reply
  41. Maxwell

    Matt Dillahunty…the world needs more Dillahunty!

    Reply
    • Dan

      Kevin Williamson? I know this site is about free speech but surely there are limits. I don’t want to spread gossip but I heard Williamson once had dinner with people who were pro-life. I don’t think he even challenged their shocking beliefs. He just sat there eating chicken and talking about the NBA playoffs, like it was the most normal thing in the world. Is that really the kind of guy the Intellectual Dark Web wants to be associated with?

      Reply
  42. Jan Anders Nelson

    What is your selection criteria for adding X? Celebrity? Number of Twitter followers? Both? Something else? I am truly curious, thanks.

    Reply
  43. egyptian

    Please consider adding Robert Sapolsky- brilliant, accomplished, and well-spoken

    I don’t know that he’d consider himself to be part of any dark web “movement” as such, but given the credentials of some of the others on here, he’d certainly round out the crowd.

    I think one benefit from a “movement” perspective is that Sapolsky gives a brilliant disclaimer at the start of his lecture series on Human Behavioral Biology (available on YouTube) about the pitfalls when talking about the influences of genetics on behavior.

    As a neuroendocrinologist, he fills in some of the details the Jordan Peterson either overlooks or misunderstands when it comes to the interplay between social hierarchy and endocrinology.

    Buried in a couple of his lectures are some very controversial ideas, particularly with respect to mental disorders and belief structures. The fact that he stated those ideas at all is evidence of his ability to shun conventional thinking.

    Reply
  44. Derek D

    Please add Dr. Deborah Soh a sexual neural scientist. She speaks out against Ggender studies and how harmful it is to science.

    Reply
  45. Rick Derris

    Tim Fcking Fggot Ferriss??? Are you fcking kidding me??? That clown is the furthest thing from an “intellectual.” Or is this thing supposed to be called the “Bllshitter Dark Web?”

    Total fail.

    Reply
  46. ETW

    At the top of each page you have a quote…you give credit to those who originally uttered these things for the quotes on the “WHO” page and the “ABOUT” page, but you do not for the “TWO OR MORE” page. Why? If you are unaware of who said that, see Matthew 18:20.

    Reply
  47. Question Assumptions (@QA_NJ)

    I recommend adding the following people:

    Lee Jussim (Social Scientist – he advocated for himself above):

    See his academic page at Rutgers: http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~jussim/papers.html
    See his Rabble Rouser blog in Psychology Today: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/rabble-rouser

    Jose Duarte (Social Scientist):

    Published a paper on political diversity and social science with Jonathan Haidt: http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~jussim/Duarte%20et%20al,%202015,%20BBS,%20target,%20commentaries,%20reply.pdf
    See his blog: http://www.joseduarte.com/blog

    Razib Khan (Geneticist):

    See his Twitter feed and blog (he’s posted in several places over the years): http://www.gnxp.com/

    Judity Curry (Climate Scientist):

    See her climate science blog: https://judithcurry.com/

    Scott Adams (Yes, the Dilbert cartoonist):

    See his Twitter feed and blog: http://blog.dilbert.com/

    Reply
    • Richard

      Nice list! I’d add Bjorn Lomborg and Roger Pielke as rational climate change thinkers.

      Reply
      • Richard

        I meant to say Roger Pielke Jr.

  48. Matthew Buckhannon

    You are missing Mike Rowe. He is leading a discussion over the classes of working people and not saying sorry for people going to trades over college.

    Reply
    • Ethan Davis

      True, and Rowe just shared an article on the IDW so I don’t think he would be opposed to having his name up.

      Reply
  49. Steven Webster

    Evolution? That word gets a used a lot here. I tend to bristle when acquaintances describe themselves as “evolved and enlightened.” It’s going to take more than intellectual honesty to evolve this mess we call humans into something more ET-like. But, I welcome the discussion and love the “intellectual dark web” name. I’d like to focus on what appears to be lacking herein — the recognition that government isn’t just politics. It’s everything, sadly. I think Douglas Adams had it right. Government by Vogons. (Adams being the most evolved human since Van Gogh.) Keep it up. Invite me in.

    Reply
      • Rob Dunham

        My bad. I looked, but the random scramble of names every time I checked back threw me. At least the I.D.W. experts agree that he belongs. Thanks for keeping me honest.

  50. David Leuchter

    +1 for Nassim Taleb. Definitely a one-of-a-kind thinker with some important ideas and a number of best-selling books. He recently appeared on YouTube with Gad Saad, and he has a long-running feud with Pinker. He’s definitely gravitating toward the intellectual dark web.

    BTW–thanks for this site. It’s awesome.

    Reply
  51. Veritas

    1) Stefan Molyneux
    2) Milo Yiannopoulos
    3) Candace Owens
    4) Cassie Jaye
    5) Peter Joseph
    6) Jimmy Dore

    Reply
  52. maree

    Can you run a page on your website that has some videos of these role models speaking? I would visit regularly.

    Reply
  53. Holland VanDieren

    How could Michael Shermer be overlooked?

    Reply
  54. Klompz

    Brendan O’Neill is absolutely missed on this site
    O well, shit takes time, its a young site 🙂
    Keep up the good work!

    Reply
  55. Tina Shumway

    Imam Tawhidi @imamofpeace I started following him on twitter & he’s awesome! Totally different viewpoint from a peaceful Muslim who wants his religion to evolve with modern times & he exposes extremists.

    Reply
    • Daniele Molteni

      Completely agree – if anyone deserves a platform, that’s Imam Tawhidi

      Reply
    • Miles

      He’s a fraud, and a Muslim hater.

      Dr Zuide Jesser would be a better choice

      Reply
  56. Roger Vaughan

    Amazing start. Thanks. Have not seen Daniel Kahneman who (along with Tversky) gave birth to a lot of this. Agree Taleb, Thiel, Sowell, Dawkins and liked the Chappelle idea.

    Reply
  57. Fred

    This whole website is the physical embodiment of the jerk off hand motion. A compilation of the most milquetoast rich political commentators who have never taken a risky position in their life. “There are two genders xD” is not a risky position lmao

    Reply
    • Steve

      It took Luther to nail his protests to the door of the cathederal in Wittenberg to start adressing the wrongness of the roman church and providing a spark to kick off the all important Reformation. If you cant see the problem, you are part of the problem.

      Alea Iacta Est.

      Libertarians will be the new rock stars….

      Reply
  58. spardeous

    StyxHexenHammer666 should be on this list.

    Guy puts out 3-4 videos per day and has a strong dialectic going with his commentators.

    Reply
  59. Martin Brock

    Tom Woods and Thaddeus Russell are both credentialed intellectuals and best selling authors with a large following on the web.

    Reply
  60. James J

    Possible Additions:
    Michael Malice — Libertarian/Anarchist writer, commentator (particularly on Korea), professional troll
    Dave Smith — Comic, podcaster, CNN contributor
    Thaddeus Russell — Historian, professor, post-modernist (of the good variety), podcaster…has started his own online “school” of sorts
    Benjamin Boyce — YouTube commentator, particularly on college campus culture wars
    Steven Pinker — Psychologist/Linguist
    Kmele Foster — Producer, podcaster, media commentator
    Caitlin Johnstone — Journalist
    Scott Adams — Cartoonist, commentator
    Scott Alexander — Psychiatrist, blogger
    Glenn Loury — Economist, podcaster

    Reply
  61. David Leuchter

    Niall Ferguson. He just referenced the IDW in some tweets. His books have an unconventional, contrarian take on history. He’s appeared on the podcasts and shows of several of the other people on this site, and he’s debated a few of them.

    Reply
  62. Erik Niemi Stockler (@enstockler)

    Tamler Sommers (Philosopher on Very Bad Wizards)

    David Pizzaro (Psychologist on Very Bad Wizards)

    Stuart Brand | Long Now Foundation : Writer, best known as editor of the Whole Earth Catalog. He founded a number of organizations, including The WELL, the Global Business Network, and the Long Now Foundation.

    Rob Reid | After On Podcast : Author and entrepreneur. He is the author of two cyberthriller novels, Year Zero: A Novel, and After On: A Novel of Silicon Valley

    Stuart Hameroff | Anesthesiologist and professor at the University of Arizona known for his studies of consciousness and his controversial contention that quantum states in neural microtubules are responsible for its emergence.

    Donald D. Hoffman | Quantitative psychologist and popular science author. He is a Professor in the Department of Cognitive Sciences at the University of California, Irvine.

    Reply
  63. Paul Beardsell

    What’s the recommended way to link to you? And what about the icon-logo?

    Reply
  64. Matt Sylvestre

    Fantastic Concept Thank You! – But where is Cathy Young ?

    Reply
  65. time for plan B

    Good stuff, love your work. Can I suggest Cassie J of “red pill” fame and Dr Rupert Sheldrake, a free thinker questioning dogmatic attitudes within science (though perhaps he’s not political enough for this site).

    Reply
    • Paul Beardsell

      Sheldrake is not so much questioning dogmatic attitudes as he is a plain old-fashioned quack. There is a difference! It seems to me that the intellectual dark web ought not be somewhere where anything goes. Next you’ll be proposing a flat-earther.

      Reply
      • Evan

        So you attack his character? How SJW of you! have you read one of his books? You could start with Science Set Free.

  66. Chris

    Thaddeus Russel (unregistered podcast / renegade university)

    Reply
  67. shel

    Love the concept of the web very much, and much appreciation to all the participants that personify its principles.
    Just two points if its o.k (sorry if my english isn’t perfect). If we are talking about an intelectual web- shouldn’t this be a place for academics only? second question (that may be a result of the first questions subject) – should someone like Joe Rogan, a talk show host/wrestling commentator that does not apply basic jurnalist standarts upon himself, be recognised as a part of an intelectual web that strives for truth? one example is him ,repetedly, giving a platform to a hate activists like Abby Martin- a persona who dedicates her life to spreading both un based anti Israeli propagandha, as well as anti semitic propogandha. The key here of course is in un based. Or if to refrase it- spreading lies with either no evidence, or selecting “evidence” from un reliable sourses, while making absulutly no effort of getting to any sort of truth, and responding agresivly to attempts to discuss new information. Rogan on his part , not only offers an open mice of 2-3 hours each time to such a figure, but also doesn’t apply basic journalistic standards like demanding proof to claims, and actually expressed almost automatic agreement with everything, treating it like facts, basing the dialogue on miss Martins claims as if they were axiomatic.
    It seems to me this is inconsistent with the webs core principles and spirit- as I at least understand them.

    Reply
    • Jade Koskela (@jkoskela0)

      Yeah Joe Rogan really doesn’t qualify, not because he isn’t an academic, but because he’s not an intellectual. He’s just somewhat open minded, I’m sure in no small part to all the DMT.

      Reply
  68. Harry Hirsh

    Our respective movements largely share the same goals. We should join forces. My name is Harry Hirsh. I’m a volunteer member of Intentional Insights, the 501c(3) which founded the Pro-Truth movement. You can contact me at hirsh.28@osu.edu. I look forward to hearing from you!

    protruthpledge.org

    Reply
  69. Cal

    Awesome idea for sharing intellectual ideas. This is like a one stop shop for intellectual ideas.

    Reply
  70. Gerald Schoenewolf

    It’s so exhausting to see the same thing happening all over again. A woman accuses a man of sexual misconduct. Right away millions of radical liberals have already made up their minds. There can only be one side of the argument for them. Instant judgment and instant judgment. And all the mainstream news reports it the same way, from the woman’s side. Or there is another mass shooting. There can only be one solution to the problem. Gun control. Millions of people protest guns. The mainstream media mocks the White Supremacists who support guns. It is always reported the same way. There is no chance that the mainstream will probe the complications of what’s going on behind the shootings. Or a white cop kills a black man. Right away there is a loud protest from the millions and millions of group thinkers. The black man has somebody ready to take a video showing the cop shooting him while he is unarmed. That’s enough evidence for the group thinkers. Little do they care that the person who was killed may have been resisting arrest or reached into his pocket for something or said something ugly and provocative to the cop. The details don’t matter to the group thinkers. Extremists can only see things from their own point of view and punish those who don’t see it from their point of view. Over and over you turn on the news or some mainstream talk show and hear the same point of view, the same radical propaganda, as if there couldn’t possibly be any other way to see it. It is so exhausting to see this, and to think about how divisive and destructive this all is and to wonder where it is going to lead us. It’s terribly, terribly exhausting.

    Reply
  71. Fiona

    Please add Martin Durkin. Martin is a filmmaker who produced “The Great Global Warming Swindle” a must-see for people who are skeptical about manmade global warming, as well as “Brexit The Movie” which lifted the lid on the EU inner workings and how it was hurting British people. I think his work is outstanding.

    Reply
  72. Sam James (@SamJ3193)

    James O’Brien.

    Ian Dunt.

    Decent representation of the centre-left in the UK at the moment, in my view. Just a suggestion 🙂

    OH!

    Jocko Willink.

    Reply
  73. alexandra puyenchet

    Bonjour,

    Je suis française et aimerais savoir si des personnes non américaines peuvent faire partie de IDW ? Et si oui, comment peut-on s’inscrire ou participer ?

    Reply
  74. Guillaume

    You should put Shoe0nHead and Armoured Skeptic in the Critical Darker Web.

    Reply
  75. jlmassey

    Hi! So glad this is growing movement of reason! A few suggestions of more material to have on here: Intelligence squared debates on youtube (especially with Aayan vs Maajid). The website: BigThing. The youtube channels: Learn Liberty, ReasonTV, PragerU, 1791l.

    Reply
  76. Shane Berryhill

    I’d like to nominate Phil Defranco. He’s a very good reporter and an honest voice in the world of nonsense political partisanship.

    Reply
  77. DRK TROOPER 15

    1791L
    Dennis Prager
    The other Daily Wire Hosts

    Reply
    • DRK TROOPER 15

      Also:
      Sargon
      Roaming Millennial
      Gavin Mcinnes
      Not Gay Jared
      Thomas Sowell

      Reply
  78. Matt

    Great to see this site back up, as I could not access it for quite some time.

    I would like to nominate Rita Pahani, an opinion columnist of Iranian descent, who is now an Australian citizen. Her parents fled Iran after being targeted by the regime of Ayatollah Khomeini.

    She is not afraid to speak her mind, and is a critic of Islam.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rita_Panahi

    Reply
  79. Dark Spider

    Excellent site, I do hope your enthusiasm will keep this going for a long time!
    I’d like to nominate two German bloggers, one left at heart and the other more critical than political: Felix von Leitner (blog.fefe.de) and Hadmut Danisch (danisch.de/blog). Both are IT people which adds an interesting touch to their approach. Their free thinking and level-headed reasoning turns their output into a must-read for hundreds of thousands of followers despite their 80’s style websites. While they are nowhere near as eloquent as many panelists on this site they spotlight the fact that programming seems to be a very effective way to sort one’s thoughts and bypass the traps that catch most others. I am sure there are other professions with similar qualities and I am certain that independent quality thinkers remain abound in so many more countries not yet represented here.

    Reply
  80. golf kilo

    Thank you for all you do! Working in Hollywood, the self censorship I impose on myself is ridiculous. This place is a breath of fresh air!

    I’d like to recommend Gerald Celente the “political atheist” forecaster from the Trends Research Institute.

    Reply
  81. Avery

    I nominate Adam Carolla and Dennis Prager for inclusion, both individually and due to their upcoming joint documentary ‘No Safe Spaces’. Both also have recurring engagement with other members of the IDW through their podcast and YouTube channel respectively as well as guesting on the platforms of included members. They are more generally outspoken in their defense of the views and values listed as criteria for inclusion.

    Reply

Leave a Reply