I saw a counter-culture developing which the main media institutions were mostly intent on ignoring or deeply misportraying. In this video, I explain how we got them to move from ignoring us to trying to laugh at us and spreading awareness and our message in the process, as well as how this counter-culture’s name was born according to the main lesson of Nassim Taleb’s “Anti-Fragility.”
“First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. And then they attack you and want to burn you. And then they build monuments to you.” -N. Klein, 1914
We have now progressed quickly to living between Klein’s stage 2 and 3 as of June 2018. If we get to the end, we intend to skip phase 4 and hold an all night intellectual victory rave instead and invite the vanquished to join in, in the spirit of drunken friendship and loyal opposition. But do subscribe to stay tuned, get invited and get involved with what happens next.
[NOTE: The subject matter of this video was re-recorded due to an audio problem on a previous version. The content is partially, though not perfectly, overlapping.]
Transcript
Hi, this is Eric Weinstein. Thanks for coming back to my YouTube channel. It’s been a little while since I posted that first video asking for content suggestions, and I’ve received a lot of great feedback. I’ve been looking at your comments and thinking about what videos might be the most interesting.
However, I thought I should start with a question: Why does the Intellectual Dark Web have such a crazy name?
The Origins of the Name
I believe I’m guilty of coining the phrase Intellectual Dark Web. I introduced it on stage at the Masonic Theatre during an event with Ben Shapiro and Sam Harris. Later, Sam titled that episode of his podcast The Intellectual Dark Web, and the term was further amplified by Barry Weiss in The New York Times, where it gained significant traction.
A lot of people have asked: Why does this movement have such a strange and unusual name? I want to talk about the reasoning behind it now that the initial wave of reactions has settled. While there are still a few fresh takes, most of the big players have already commented, so I wanted to let some time pass before explaining further.
The Design Behind the Name
The central thesis is that what is now called the commentariat—the mainstream media and cultural gatekeepers—was always going to dislike both the emergence of this movement and any name attached to it.
Why?
- Is it because the ideas are terrible?
- Because the people involved are deplorable?
- I don’t think so.
The reason is that the Intellectual Dark Web (IDW) is an alternative sense-making collective. It takes what is happening in the world and analyzes it independently, often arriving at conclusions that differ significantly from those in mainstream publications—particularly those on the left, which many of us once relied on for curating interpretations of world events.
Whether it’s The Atlantic, NPR, or The New York Times, these institutions have recently behaved very differently than they did, say, 20 years ago. The commentariat—those who regularly offer their takes on current events—seems to have been captured by a new ideological network. This new network thinks in ways that are fundamentally different from the traditional perspectives that once dominated these institutions.
The Intellectual Dark Web as a Rival
Because of this shift, I believe the Intellectual Dark Web is seen as a rival to the mainstream media’s business model. Instead of assessing us accurately, they perceive us as a threat and attack us on those terms.
Since the commentariat still holds considerable power—despite its waning influence—we always knew that whatever name this movement had, it would be ridiculed and attacked. So, when naming it, I decided to employ what I call an “Estufagem” strategy (a term derived from the Portuguese wine Madeira).
Madeira is unique in that, once opened, it does not spoil because it undergoes a process of heating and oxidation. This makes it anti-fragile—it is resistant to degradation. Similarly, I wanted to give the movement a name that was born anti-fragile—one that would withstand relentless criticism.
The Joke Within the Name
Because the name Intellectual Dark Web is unconventional—some might even say cringe-worthy, disturbing, or self-important—it was already immune to additional ridicule. From its inception, it was an easy target for mockery, which paradoxically guaranteed its high memetic acceptance.
In other words, the commentariat found the name so ridiculous that they couldn’t resist spreading it—exactly what we wanted.
The name also serves as a Trojan horse strategy. By making fun of it, the media unwittingly helped propagate the term.
Now that the name has lived on, I can reveal that there were a couple of intentional jokes baked into it.
1. The Word “Dark”
The word dark has two key meanings here.
- First, something that is hard to find or in stealth mode.
- However, we have never truly been in stealth mode, as even people like Paul Krugman have commented on our presence.
- Second, dark can imply something evil or morally corrupt.
- This is ironic because I see the IDW as a movement for decency, integrity, and intellectual honesty.
- The joke, then, is that we are neither hidden nor evil, despite the media’s framing.
2. How the Media Reacted
When mainstream outlets tried to make sense of us, they were of two minds:
- On one hand, they dismissed us as irrelevant:
These people are just a bunch of self-important pseudo-intellectuals.
- On the other hand, they claimed we were dangerous and needed to be de-platformed.
The contradiction is obvious:
If we’re insignificant, why are we so threatening?
The Intellectual Component
Despite attempts to discredit us, the IDW is filled with PhDs and intellectuals. People don’t listen to three-hour podcasts for entertainment alone—they seek out stimulating discussions.
I see the IDW as a reaction to a dramatic shift in mainstream institutions over the past five to ten years. Networks like CNN and The New York Times have changed to the point where they can no longer cover certain stories objectively if those stories contradict their narratives.
The Larger Problem
The IDW exists because certain stories can no longer be discussed honestly in mainstream outlets. The new ideological network that has taken over these institutions relies heavily on reputational destruction rather than rational debate.
Example: The Chess Question
Why are only 1 out of the top 100 chess players female?
There are several possible explanations:
- Cultural factors
- Systemic biases
- Biological differences
- Socialization
But we are not allowed to ask the question without immediately assuming the answer must be structural oppression. The inability to explore alternative explanations—even in a domain as insignificant as chess—demonstrates how rigid and unscientific the new system has become.
What the IDW Stands For
So why does the IDW exist? It is not a unified movement with a single ideology, religion, or political stance. Instead, it is animated by the collapse of a previous consensus:
The belief that enlightenment values—evidence, reason, and open inquiry—should guide sense-making.
The mainstream media has abandoned these principles in favor of ideological narratives, and the IDW stands as a rival sense-making network.
Final Thoughts
The name Intellectual Dark Web was deliberately designed to:
- Be anti-fragile—capable of withstanding attacks.
- Be memetic—ensuring widespread adoption.
- Highlight the failure of the mainstream media’s curation process.
I know the name sounds strange at first, but hopefully, you see the humor in it now. It was always meant to be provocative.
So, get excited—there’s more to come.
Thanks for watching, and greetings from the IDW.
Be well.
