Against the Darkness of Enlightenment

There is a movement that calls itself the “Dark Enlightenment.” The term sounds paradoxical—wasn’t Enlightenment the light that freed humanity from ignorance and authority? Yes—but that is precisely the point.

The so-called “Dark Enlightenment,” a term coined in the 2000s by British philosopher Nick Land, questions the fundamental principles of classical Enlightenment. Its adherents—often technocratic, elitist, or authoritarian—believe that democracy has failed, equality is an illusion, and human society is better governed by intelligent elites.

What is sold as “realism” is, in truth, a cold nihilism: freedom only for the strong, order through control, and humans reduced to mere data points. The goal? An efficient, purified state—not for everyone, but for those who “deserve” it.

This movement grows—mostly in the shadows. Its influence on political discourse, particularly in the American sphere, cannot be underestimated. In parts of the internet, it is celebrated as a “Counter-Enlightenment”: rational, cold, uncompromising. A philosophy for machine-humans.

But what is missing is the human.

The Human Is Not an Algorithm

Freedom is more than the right to be strong. It is the ability to say no—even to one’s own power. It is the possibility to limit oneself, not out of weakness, but out of insight.

Whoever absolutizes freedom—and denies it to others—becomes a slave to their own ideology. A freedom that applies only to oneself is not freedom but overreach.

The point is not to return to the old Enlightenment. It, too, was incomplete—too focused on reason, too universalist, too instrumentalizing.

But the response to a cold worldview cannot be to make it even colder. The answer is warmth, measure, responsibility.

The New Path Is Not Weak but Awake

We need a mindset that sees humans not as a problem but as a possibility. A mindset that does not end in systems but begins in relationships.

This includes:

• The ability to endure contradictions—without immediately eradicating them.
• The willingness to question oneself—not just others.
• The courage to demand freedom not only for oneself but also to tolerate it for others.

We do not need a new elite. We need new humility—in thinking, in deciding, in being.

And if someone says: “Humans are bad, democracy has failed, we need clarity instead of chaos,” then one should reply: “You may speak out of disappointment. But if you stop believing in humanity—you have stopped being part of the solution.”

Enlightenment without compassion is blind. Power without measure becomes violence. And freedom without connection is loneliness.

Humans do not need a system that controls them. They need an order that arises from within themselves—from their ability for insight, responsibility, and care.

More control is not the solution—but more humanity.