undefined | Better HN

0 pointscoldtea5y ago0 comments

>The irony is that non-conformist thinkers tend to sound similar after a while.

Non-comformist means outside the mainstream.

There's no infinite variety outside the mainstream, and even if there was, it doesn't matter in its entirety (nobody will call you a non-conformist for writing about butterflies, even if it's not mainstream).

What most matters is the subset of the variety of topics directly opposed by conformist views.

So, that's what non-comformists explore primarily. And that's the value in having non-conformists.

Not some variety of millions of irrelevant viewpoints on this and that - but as a counter-voice to what's promoted 24/7 on all mainstream sources.

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

Bakary5y ago· 1 in thread

It's possible I am viewing the situation too harshly, but so far non-conformism been disappointing. I do agree with you that it's nice that there at least are some people doing something else. I am bringing criticism without proposing solutions, but I find it fun to discuss those topics to begin with.

Essentially it falls into a few categories.

- The free-speech crowd: while I appreciate that they go against the mainstream media and the neoliberal consensus, they tend to default to invoking values and symbolic victories without much in way of an actual plan or policy proposals. Essentially a new form of the aestheticization of politics in a different context. From Trump to Parler, it all feels very postmodern in a way and keeps changing randomly.

- The intellectual dark web: these spend most of their time hinting at controversy and reiterating their stance as free thinkers, but it rarely goes beyond questioning SJW ideology and arguing for just a more optimistic version of the current form of capitalism. (Pinker, for example) It's frustrating because it really seems like they could band together to produce some great things.

- Various self-help authors or commentators whose career is based on debates, media production, and who essentially promote the same ideas as the dark web, but in a more packageable format and with a focus on personal improvement and subscription or ad based revenue generation. (Shapiro, JBP)

- Rationalists: spend most of their time discussing lifestyle differences and AI. The latter is obviously very important, but they don't really address current problems and prefer to talk about Bayesian statistics in their own zone, or provide thrill-seeking to tech workers. It's unclear what they even achieve with all that rationality other than discussing it. HPMOR is great, though.

- The modern day far-left: those who aren't aligned with the mainstream and who don't pursue idpol are mostly in a state of disarray, in small numbers, a mirror version of the commentators described above, or subject to tankism

All in all, many of them are doing better than me on the front of ideas but it's not very motivating.

coldteaOP5y ago

That's true.

But there's no real endgame anyone has, it's just a pushback against "mainstream media and the neoliberal consensus" aka, the establishment, modern big tech, bipartisan monoculture, and so on.

An endgame would require some positive vision for the future (whether it includes adopting some elements from the past or inventing new ones). But there might not be any.

History creates those visions (that is, historical forces, changes in material conditions, new opportunities, demographic changes, etc) not will alone. The thinkers thinking the visions usually come later (and even if they come before the historical changes, they're ignored, until the landascape is ready for their ideas).

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse