This is a blog post from
It has taken an election that may or may not have disastrous consequences on the world, and a referendum result that seems obviously wrong in retrospect, for the offline world to be introduced to a concept that many online are already familiar with — post-truth.
And in the emergence of this phenomenon rests a willingness to address the world as either a participant or an enemy, without the choice of creating or embracing a third option. An inability to accept the existence of alternate viewpoints, coupled with anxieties over the present gives rise to a narrative of the ‘other’.
While nuance in debate is all but lost, the emergence of black and white narratives has created more hate and less understanding.
It is in environments like these that the creation of a strongman, one who claims to be the panacea to all that is troublesome, happens. This leads to polarisation of opinion, and eventually, policy too.
>“Ever since men became capable of free speculation, their actions, in innumerable important respects, have depended upon their theories as to the world and human life, as to what is good and what is evil,”~ Bertrand Russell
It was Mussolini who said that the crowd loves strong men.
“The crowd doesn't have to know. It must believe. If we only give them faith that mountains can be moved, they will accept the illusion that mountains are moveable, and thus an illusion may become reality.” ~ Benito Mussolini
It is also fascinating, as an observer, to see the state of the world today. In an age where individuality is heralded as the new great thing — an idea at odds with what Eastern societies have believed for generations — one sees Western societies falling prey to herd behaviour. To blame the easy proliferation of information as the cause for this seems reductive and simplistic, at best. Instead, we need to take a closer look at the willingness of those who consume such information to pass it on without much scrutiny, closely.
It doesn't matter anymore if the information is true or, in some cases, if the person who disseminates it even believes in it. If anything, all this promotes is more 'other'-ing; only this time, it is practised consciously and not as a by-product of a person’s actions. The human mind finds it easy to identify an issue with a villain and blame it on said character. A rallying cry to unite against a perceived common enemy is far more powerful than it seems, as one can glean from that Mussolini quote.
“Give people a common enemy, and you will give them a common identity. Deprive them of an enemy and you will deprive them of the crutch by which they know who they are.” ~ James Alison, a Roman Catholic theologian, LGBT activist, and former priest
This was not something that Adolf Hitler or Mussolini began in the mid-20th century. Making people believe that there is a bigger enemy out there waiting to destroy us all is the theme that all leaders have used since time immemorial.
Indeed, this is what has happened for the whole of 2016. But the events that led up to it played a major role in the way the world was shaped this year. Instances of such events happening have historically ended with calamitous consequences, usually the loss of human life. And as time progresses, we have found an easy way to deal with such loss — apathy.
Because apathy is not impactful. Human lives are valued only after they are lost, never while the actual act occurs. We don’t yet know if the events of this year and the circumstances that led to them are representative of a tipping point. 2017 and later years will have the answer to that question.
