This Machine Makes Fascism
How Media and Technology Are Influencing Us (And How to Stop It)
I permanently deleted my Facebook account shortly after Donald Trump won the 2016 Presidential election. Most of my digital media habits died out from there, some slower than others. In the decade since that election, like many of you, I struggled to come to grips with the rising tide of fascism, as well as our inability to do anything about it. We learned about the influence of algorithms, fake news, filter bubbles, Cambridge Analytica, and so much more. But we went on using it like we were immune. One of the problems I found is that people (myself included) were under the mistaken assumption that a “symptom of the sickness” of media influence was voting for Trump or being a supporter of MAGA in general. The evidence for this conclusion was that “we” did not vote for Trump, who is an obvious con-artist, and therefore “we” must be immune to media effects. This ignores a competing argument, which is that: “we” are not conservatives and therefore “we” did not watch conservative news, and so “we” were not influenced to support MAGA. But that doesn’t mean “we” were not influenced by the media “we” used.
One day not long after Trump took office, I realized that I was starting to think about my day, my family, my work, my friends, and my world in ways that were directly influenced by Facebook. I would see my kids playing and want to capture it and share it on social media. I would mine conversations for interesting tidbits that could be crafted into an interesting post. I would see the beauty of my world only in terms of its worthiness to be shared as a post. When I realized all these changes were noticeable shifts in the way I was thinking, I became both enraged and frightened by their influence on me. I got rid of Facebook, but kept using other media, social and traditional, until I noticed that the process was just repeating itself with those as well. I would discover that some media technology or content I consumed was influencing me in some way, and I would feel uneasy about using it. Nonetheless, without knowing how media influence works, we are destined to continue bouncing recklessly from one technology to the next until one finally does us all in. I humbly submit what I have learned while trying to find the answer.
The Problem is Artificial Humanity
The bias that we have, which makes us susceptible to influence by the media and technology, and has led us to fascism on several occasions, is efficiency. It is the adoption of a logic of instrumentality, functionality, speed, and predictability. Frankfurt School author Max Horkheimer, known for his research into the relationship between media and fascism, contended that when humans adopted this kind of reasoning, we would operate purely as tools, serving a mechanical function rather than a human one. We would think only in terms of the means to achieve a goal. In his Critique of Instrumental Reason, Horkheimer argued that “mastery of nature has not brought man to self-realization, on the contrary, the status quo continues to exert its objective compulsion.” In short, technology is not leading humanity to more knowledge, more autonomy, or more freedom, but instead leads us to more obedience and support for the existing arrangements. Our focus on efficiency robs us of our ability to supply any critical questions about the status quo and our role in directing our lives.
This explains my experience with Facebook in the aftermath of the 2016 election. I felt as though I was becoming a function of the platform, I was learning to think in ways that served the interests of the platform. I found myself caring more and more about the things and people on the platform, awaiting their prompts and compulsions and updates, feeling satisfied for achieving the appropriate accolades. Facebook needed me to watch content, to “like” things, share content, post, comment, and interact. That is the role of a user of the platform, so I complied. And it felt oddly rewarding to do so, at least at first. Having technology drastically increase the speed, efficiency, and capacity for interacting with other humans was wildly appealing. This distracted us from the fact that it was nearly impossible for us to resist. Before we knew it, the logic of social media had become automatic and reflexive for people, just simpler to use it constantly, for everything, even in the real world (which is where exactly?). Then one day, you realize you could not begin to imagine living without these things.
Our tendency for instrumental reasoning may be hardwired into our species, requiring active, deliberate, critical thought to overcome it. Consider it this way: at one end of a spectrum, we have critical thinking and analysis. And on the other end, we have instrumental reasoning. One requires lots of energy, one requires much less. If we are without much technology, and have to walk around, hunt and gather, build structures to live in using resources in our environment, and so on, we would be forced to exert ourselves in both physical and mental labor. The less technology we have, the more we have to do this kind of work. As we develop technology, it makes the work of survival much easier, more efficient, less demanding, which leads to more of us surviving. This is always going to be a driving impulse for our species, both at an individual and societal level. This type of thinking is the easier one to engage with, so it has an advantage over critical thinking.
However, if left unchecked or unexamined, our innate drive to make our survival easier can quickly become destructive to our whole species. Take for example how we feel about exercising our bodies. Conserving energy at all costs makes perfect sense for any species that seeks to survive and reproduce. Modern humans perfected the use of tools and technology, so much so that we have now automated many of our daily physical tasks to machinery. As a result, we have physical energy to spare and have reluctantly accepted that we have to make exercise part of our lives, as well as eating a balanced diet. We bicycle, take public transportation, walk our dogs, play sports, and eat our vegetables. Humanity well understands that it must resist this particular impulse for instrumental reasoning or risk the deterioration of our bodies. We also recognize that doing these activities requires extra effort, exertion, and sustained attention. It is a permanent battle against ourselves to do this, and a powerful motivator is that we want to contribute to a healthier society, prolonged species, as wealth as a healthier existence for ourselves.
The body cannot make a distinction between mental or physical energy when applying the law of conservation. Because of this, we humans are predisposed to automate our thinking for the same reason we do our physical activities: because it is easier, more efficient, and more productive. It is mental labor that is being automated via the media. This is why media and advertisements telling you what the majority of people think actually does work on us; “influencers” do influence you directly. We have a physical bias to conserve energy, which influences how we spend energy. This is why media is irresistibly appealing to us.
Mass Media, AI, and Fascism
It is easier to simply accept the conclusions of the people speaking to us than to challenge them. Instrumental reasoning encourages us to submit to systems of thinking that resolve our questions, while critical thinking would require us to use up energy to investigate and resolve the claims being made. Media influences us by taking advantage of this bias towards efficiency, supplying us with convenient conclusions, answers, and enemies, saving us the energy of working that out on their own. The more we hear one set of voices, to the exclusion of others, the more we become like that group. You only become aware of the change when the source of influence is cut off, and your capacity for critical inquiry is reengaged through community. This can’t happen until you give up your media.
Another reason the media influences us is because we are primates and have an innate desire to be part of the group. As Horkheimer pointed out, when instrumental reasoning prevails, our interior self is soon replaced with a desire only for “technological expertise, presence of mind, pleasure in the mastery of machinery, and the need to be part of and to agree with the majority, or some group that is chosen as a model and whose regulations replace individual judgement.” On the spectrum of critical thought and instrumental reasoning, authoritarianism occurs when a society places expediency and productivity above concern for currently living humans. Authoritarians emerged from within both left and right political movements because this bias impacts us all. It is not a symptom of the right or even conservative thinking: authoritarianism will result from any human society that favors efficiency and productivity over slow, critical, and deliberate thought.
AI technology is not some mystical, unknowable machinery, but is instead just a new brand of technology that risks taking advantage of our bias towards instrumental reasoning. Data centers store our data, comprised of the various human activities that were either captured in the past or are currently being captured via one of the many apps and digital devices that we use. That is the infrastructure of this economy. It extracts human data in order to make humans who will supply it with more data. They are using that data to make products that appeal to us, and they will be so irresistible because those products automate mental labor. They are appealing to us because they have the potential to make our lives more efficient. Faster. More productive. It might connect us to more people, or make communication easier. It might make us better organized. But why is that so important? Ask yourself: what are we currently getting out of this? More free time? More time with people we love? Better mental health? Better physical health?
These products will never deliver on their hype because these are ultimately just consumer products. Like all others that have ever existed: they are made using human labor of some kind, they depend on humans to use them and buy them, and many of them do not work nearly as well as the peddlers claim. What AI will do is intensify the excessive use of robotic, instrumental thinking in our lives, and that is to be resisted at all costs. These peddlers of AI continue to act surprised when their “agents” do something unethical. You should not be surprised that a machine chooses not to use human ethics, especially when we humans fall victim to the same thinking as the machine: efficiency, productivity, completion of the objective. But we can make a choice, machines cannot.
Speaking of choices, we do not have to give them our data, and we do not have to use any of their products. Ever. We can stop using their platforms, streaming services, and apps. And yes, the way we live as a society and as individuals, will have to change. But isn’t that the point? To be in charge of how we live and where we go as a society? We should be so lucky.
