Algorithms and the death of critical thinking

A podcast recently arrived on my phone and I viewed it reluctantly, but was a pleasant surprise, had the arresting title, ‘Why STUPID People Are a Greater Threat to Society Than Criminals’. The podcaster/influencer opened with a quote from Deitrich Bonhoeffer:

‘There is a hidden force more dangerous than evil itself that was responsible for immense destruction during World War Two, unlike evil this force cannot be reasoned with, exposed or even fought directly. It spread silently, rendering people blind and immune to logic. That force is stupidity. Unlike malice, which can be confronted, stupidity is immune to logic, resistant to reason and dangerously convinced of its own rightness.’

The presenter goes on:

’… exploring Bonhoeffer’s insights into stupidity as a socio-psychological phenomenon, showing how it enables authoritarianism, propaganda and mass manipulation. It also provides practical steps to resist stupidity, such as maintaining critical thinking, avoiding groupthink, recognising manipulation tactics, and embracing intellectual independence… In a world filled with misinformation and blind loyalty, Bonhoeffer’s warning remains more relevant than ever. To combat stupidity, we must stay critical, stay aware, and refuse to be ruled by ignorance.’

The podcaster was encouraging critical thinking. Possibly, that was missing, or discouraged in Germany as the National Socialist Party took control.

It seems there is nothing new under the sun, just the means of achieving the control, the manipulation, the groupthink, changes with technology. Bonhoeffer referred to the rise of authoritarianism groupthink and manipulations of Europe, and particularly Nazi Germany, but the same tactics are evident today in a number of countries, the USA is most notable, but the tentacles of the manipulation spread far and wide through social media and the algorithms which drive the distribution of podcasts and influencers who drive the political agendas.

Search for something on the internet, Google, YouTube, or another search engine and the algorithm employed suddenly comes up with a whole host of similar things, links to news and commentary, videos reinforcing the topic, and point of view of the information that started the quest for information.

It becomes an echo chamber. Repeating the same stuff over and over.

I was recently sent a link to a YouTube on that cursed Socialism, and on opening, was presented with a stream of negativity on that topic. And because I opened that link, suddenly a host of links appear, reinforcing the negativity effects of socialism and how it is a curse to any society.

I actually find it hard to imagine a democratic form of government without a degree of socialism embedded.

Using YouTube or Google as a source for information is a good thing, type in a search topic and up comes a whole host of information, articles, other links. The algorithm recognises your interests and seemingly answers your question. And without asking further questions, the links will conform, time and again the same to the same philosophic stance. By limiting the source material to that which the algorithm presents, limits the ability to critically analyse the information.

To follow the example of ‘Socialism’, and allow some degree of critical thinking, instead of wiping it out as evil, perhaps other questions can lead into examples of where socialism works in providing services and infrastructure by governments.

Imagine for a moment what Australia would be like without a ‘mixed’ political philosophy, a swing to right and to left through the various electoral cycles, both at state and at federal levels. And that has been the way in most democratic countries, a swing left, a swing right. The checks and balances which the various governments put in place, the needs for investment in infrastructure, a major economic cost, but one which benefits both the vested interests of capital as well as of the working people, it benefits the rich and the poor.

Where socialism is decried as limiting freedoms, as described by F.A. Hayek in ‘The Road to Serfdom’, is that socialism threatens democracy, by limiting economic freedom, intellectual freedom and the rule of law.

Hayek refers principally to Soviet Russia, and the diatribe he offers is not reflective of how socialism works in democracies. Soviet Russia was never democratic, the claim that it was democratic, is wrong, only party members could vote, only party members had a voice. And yes, those threats were realised in Soviet Russia, but that cannot be said of the democracies which developed after World War Two, by the ‘winners’ of that conflict and in the reconstruction of the German and Japanese economies.

We see the fear of socialism, redefined today as a fear of the ‘left’, in various posts critical of the Albanese Labor government. Time after time, Sky News, News Ltd, many Facebook posts and YouTube videos are critical, headlines where Albanese cops criticism after ‘failing’ here or there, failing to meet with President Trump, being snubbed by President Trump, or failing to secure the treaty with PNG a couple of weeks back when the PNG Parliamentarians were celebrating their 50th anniversary of independence and could not manage a quorum required in the Parliament to approve the treaty. Peter Dutton called him ‘weak’, and the implication of the headlines and articles try to paint him as such. Socialism is ‘weak’ in that it looks after those deemed unworthy, or lazy or inept.

Even positives are presented as negatives. Why did Albanese go to the Labour conference in Britain on his way home from the UN General Assembly meeting? Could it be that the British Prime Minister and his cabinet were all there. What a great opportunity to talk across different topics, and, yes, to be invited to speak at their conference. Oh and there were a couple of other places he went on the way home, and did not miss opportunities to do the diplomatic thing and meet other leaders, to discuss common issues. Albanese is not a ‘grand-stander’, he just gets on with his job.

But let’s apply a bit of ‘Critical Thinking’ to the criticism of that dreaded bogy of socialism.

The time of greatest economic growth here in Australia, in Western Europe and in the USA was the period between 1950 and 1980. The post war reconstruction saw many social benefits, the development of national health services in Britain and in most Western European nations and here in Australia too. We saw the development of mass transport infrastructure, railways, roads, airports and shipping ports as economies grew, we saw also that time was the fairest in the distribution of the wealth generated through the industrial and economic growth of the post war period. Home ownership grew exponentially, one car families became two car families, people travelled for holidays, exploring their own countries and travelling to exotic places, Bali became ‘our back yard’, tourism grew, ordinary working people could enjoy a life their parents and grand parents could not even dream of.

The Thatcher, Reagan years saw economic philosophy change, the trickle down theory, where the wealth going to the owners of the ,means of production would trickle down to benefit those struggling at the bottom of the socio-economic pyramid would see the benefits of a penny or two finding its ay to feed the least of the society. Since then we have seen the balance shift, the number of billionaires has grown, the richest are becoming richer by the minute, yet the poorest cannot afford a house, a roof over their heads. I know, we have a housing crisis… Have we bothered to look what is happening elsewhere in the world?

And the algorithms will find someone other than those in power to blame.

The hot issues of who or what to blame… Forget the ‘what’, it is always a ‘who’.

He’s fading from the news a little, but the list of ‘who’ were the problems cited by Charlie Kirk remain hot topics, but they weren’t Kirk’s topics really, they have been around seemingly forever, just heightened in the tense political climate of today, and we really must quest both how real those issues are and in whose interest are they raised.

Immigrants: And doesn’t that travel well? The anti-immigrants moves in the USA, in Europe, and here in Australia strike a chord. The housing crisis is all the fault of all those people coming in from overseas, or in Europe, the refugee crisis, with over 100 million people being stateless, with almost 2 billion people living in war zones, is it any wonder that people are looking for safe places to live, looking for somewhere, anywhere, they can find food, housing, work, to find dignity? Hannah Arendt identifies a ‘superfluous’ people, superfluous to requirements, superfluous because they do not ‘fit, wrong colour, wrong religion, or just wrong.

And there could be paragraph after paragraph on the others… Race, Gender Identity, Climate Change. Free Speech, Antisemitism, Islamophobia, Replacement Theory, Wokeness (whatever that means), Gun Control, The Radical Left… Add to the list, the reasons to fear are many, as are the reasons to hate.

There is nothing new under the sun. History teaches us that but in the hubbub of the day to day, we are not encouraged to take time to think, the flood of what the algorithms choose for us to digest is far too compelling, far too urgent to sit back and reflect, to think it through, to seek more information. We do not question who drives the algorithms and what their motivations may be.

In political discourse particularly, the algorithms seem to thrive not on legitimate debate but a trashing of ‘others’. Hate-filled rhetoric abounds. As described in ‘Difficult Women’ by Helen Lewis in referencing a dispute on feminism published in a 1976 edition of Ms magazine:

‘Trashing is a particularly vicious form of character assassination which amounts to psychological rape. It is manipulative, dishonest and excessive. It is occasionally disguised by rhetoric of honest conflict, or covered up by denying that any disapproval exists at all. But it is not done to expose disagreements or resolve differences. It is done to disparage and destroy.’ (Difficult Women: Hellen Lewis 2020, Page 169.)

That sounds a lot like the discourse on social media, the podcasters or headlines in so much of the media. It sounds a lot like Charlie Kirk debating or podcasting his views, All made to amplify the noise in the echo chambers, to fill the sound scape with noise designed to stop critical thinking, to stop looking for truth, to stop analysing what is happening.

The title of the podcast about stupid people being a threat, reflecting on the stuff that is presented to ‘stupid people’ through the algorithms, suggest that the greatest threat we have are those who generate those algorithms, knowing that by overloading those ‘stupid people’, they will not have time or energy for true critical thinking, and will just ring the cash registers of those businesses controlled by some of the wealthiest people in the world, people who are disdainful even of governments, knowing they have more wealth and and are more influential than the those governments… But only if we let them.

Keep Independent Journalism Alive – Support The AIMN

Dear Reader,

Since 2013, The Australian Independent Media Network has been a fearless voice for truth, giving public interest journalists a platform to hold power to account. From expert analysis on national and global events to uncovering issues that matter to you, we’re here because of your support.

Running an independent site isn’t cheap, and rising costs mean we need you now more than ever. Your donation – big or small – keeps our servers humming, our writers digging, and our stories free for all.

Join our community of truth-seekers. Donate via PayPal or credit card via the button below, or bank transfer [BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969] and help us keep shining a light.

With gratitude,

The AIMN Team