A Response to Responsibility; An Apologist’s Polemic

The “Dark Web” is a label referring to the group of academic thinkers committed to promoting ideas outside of the mainstream media in a way that challenges the status quo of thought leadership.

5 months ago

Latest Post Rarely Difficult for the Average Man, yet... by Baruch Spinoza public

A Response to Responsibility; An Apologist’s Polemic

p.(x) = Big Data Determinism (2020) by Daniel Sanderson - #Googleplanksip

A Response to Responsibility; An Apologist’s Polemic

The “Dark Web” is a label referring to the group of academic thinkers committed to promoting ideas outside of the mainstream media in a way that challenges the status quo of thought leadership. In the way, Dark Web, was first used in this context by Eric Weinstein on The Rubin Report in May of 2018.14. It is my sincere hope that the intellectual integrity of this group, and others who participate, is maintained. It comes down to integrity. I first starting thinking about this when I discovered Quillette. Below is from their about page…

What is Quillette? (from Quillette’s website)

“Quillette is a platform for free thought. We respect ideas, even dangerous ones. We also believe that free expression and the free exchange of ideas help human societies flourish and progress. Quillette aims to provide a platform for this exchange.”

The following is a comment in response to an article on Quillette called, “Man of Yesterday: Karl Marx and His Place in History” by Robert Darby, and comes from a user with the tag, “POC”, on May 8th, 2018…

“I don’t see how one can write about Marx without noting that his real legacy is an ideology based on utopianism and historicism that repeatedly resulted in totalitarian regimes that murdered tens of millions of people in the 20th century. Karl Popper develops this idea in The Open Society.”
“That some people still glorify him and pursue his policies is both incomprehensible and horrifying. That’s his true relevance today.”
“He may have been great guy and sophisticated thinker but let’s not forget the body count.” - POC (2008),

It doesn't make a difference whether you are correct or wrong. Indeed, even somebody who is "correct" can have an off-base reaction to a circumstance which not the slightest bit legitimizes the reaction just in light of the fact that they were "correct."

Will you own your reaction today?

In what capacity may your point of view change on the off chance that you started completely claiming your reactions?

In what capacity may your associations with others change in the event that you started completely possessing your reactions?

This is absolutely about YOU. This isn't tied in with advising others to react better or to claim their reaction, this is about you assuming proprietorship and liability for your reaction. On the excursion to a remarkable life, this rule can make a huge difference!

Before I advance a reflective or philosophic perspective on this I want to point out that I read the article and would like to know how I verify some of these perspectives. Can Robert Darby defend all the interesting claims or provide citations to his research? How about this user (POC)?

I have thought about this perspective often. This is very similar to how I feel on the topic of discussing Marxism with Marxist thinkers. There is never an acceptance of correlation between the murderous and totalitarian regimes of the 20th century and Marxism. I challenge the Marxist thinkers to take responsibility and reformulate their ideology. What was it about the rise of Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pot, Mao, and Hitler that Marxism influenced. This is the polemic and the conversation worth having with the rise of the Progressive Marxist Apologist. Who else is better qualified to apply the words of Karl Marx to the temptations of the psychopathic? For sure not the psychopathic! Marxist thinkers are the prime candidates for accepting this responsibility and providing the world with academically rigorous study and interpretation on the tipping point of human humaneness. And don’t blame it on capitalism and the “system”, this is only a scapegoat and a way of shifting responsibility. When you take responsibility, we all take responsibility if we are going to be intellectually honest and flourish in the future.

Individuals might have the option to control us genuinely however they can't control our musings! Individuals can treat us horribly yet they can't control our soul!

I can manage my own inward reactions – this is an undeniable right. Nobody can make me disdain them.

Indeed, even the Gestapo, as common amazing as they were by all accounts, couldn't run over the French man's inward domain.

How does an individual arrive at where they are not, at this point managed by other's treatment of them?

We start by understanding My reaction is my duty!

We don't have to sulk or frown. We don't have to give the quiet treatment or let the fierceness work within us until it emerges from our mouths like a fixture – recall it is your duty to control your inward contemplations, those frightful propensities that have gotten so insane. Time to look at them square without flinching and state – I don't need to hear you out… .I don't need to react thusly!!

In the event that we let others control how we react, at that point they are the ace of our feelings. In the event that they are mean and vile, we will be despondent. What we are stating, at that point, is that we are a sad and powerless enthusiastic casualty to the dispositions and mentalities of others around us!

At the point when we are around wanton and dastardly individuals, there is no expectation for us. We are at the impulse of these contrary individuals and we will have a spoiled day!

This doesn't need to be our existence!

Daniel Sanderson

Published 5 months ago

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.