There are a gazillion theories behind the seismic shift globally, be it in terms of cultural, social, and above all political. Yet, the professorial musing one comes across feigning the “shift” is not captivating, as it is hollow in nature; with all earnest, folks neither give much of a hoot nor have a coherent idea about what the many abstract concepts permeating in the “cultured” spaces are. Still, after plenty of reading on this topic, per se, I seem to have an inkling towards why we find ourselves in such a baffling quagmire, or in other words, the reasoning behind change feeling unprecedented, making the word itself effacing of reality.
In the past, or for that matter, in the recent past, elections and the social zeitgeist, largely in liberal democratic societies, were decided on a simple barometer, or as the catchphrase goes, “It’s the economy, stupid.” Fast forward, now, in effect: it’s the algorithm, stupid.
Subsequent to living in the world for a time, it is not fanciful to deduce human nature as primarily being flawed, such that it is a spectrum, or as Kant would put it, “We are a box of crooked timber.” In extension, besides the blemish facet, virtue is something that is not abundant, yet still existent. However, imagine if the sparse minority — of bad actors — were bestowed upon a potent tool: that is, to ubiquitously penetrate ideas into the minds of primitive beings. Of such, what would be the ramification?
If you are still thinking, think thrice. Have you built your abstraction of the social reality on the values enshrined by your family, religion, or civic community, or in contrast from messiahs of self-righteousness on the internet?
Hatred, angst, malice, and animosity are tendencies that are part and parcel of the economics of novel forms of tech, which invariably also proliferate to our common and political discourse. Which is to say, being liberal in the conventional sense is counter-intuitive, wherein winning morally or electorally is easy by erecting socially construed binaries.
To avoid misunderstandings, being liberal, under my purview, is not an ideology but a way of life: to see the world without being encumbered by parochial dogmas. Suffice to say, if the contrary is espoused — to be illiberal — that would imply capitulating both physically and mentally, forfeiting one thing any entity is not supposed to buy: the ability to think.
In short, the explanation cannot be simpler than such. To allay another misthought, by no stretch of the imagination does such a retort insinuate for all to become tech luddites, thereby disowning the myriads of vital tools.
But nonetheless, do use the Instas, Snapchats, and Twitters of the world with restraint: question if “you” are beholden to an entity that is disingenuous to you — seeding an illusory world in your eyes for the sake of being expedient for you.
Remember, do not cave in to your ghastliest impulses; the algorithm lies, but your eyes — what you literally see — do not.
