Is rattling close to all the pieces a cult now?
That’s a glib distillation of an attention-grabbing thought I not too long ago encountered. The fundamental thesis was that the web has shattered the potential for a monoculture and the results of that may be a extremely fragmented society that feels more and more like a free connection of cults stacked on prime of one another.
To say that all the pieces is a cult is a little bit of an overstatement, however as a basic framework for understanding the world in the meanwhile, it’s useful. The best way we devour content material, the way in which fandom works, the methods we kind ourselves into tribes and camps on-line, even the way in which numerous industries work, together with the information enterprise — all of it has shades of culthood. That is simpler to see when you put aside the extra excessive examples of cults, like those that finish in mass suicide or shootouts with the ATF, and as an alternative consider cults as actions or establishments that arrange themselves across the perception that the mainstream is essentially damaged.
Understood this manner, there are many cults, or cult-adjacent teams, and never all of them are unhealthy. But when society retains drifting on this path, what is going to that imply for our shared democratic tradition? How a lot fragmentation can we maintain?
To assume all of this via, I invited Derek Thompson to The Grey Space. He’s a workers author on the Atlantic, the host of the podcast Plain English, and the one who initially floated this concept concerning the cultification of society. Under is an excerpt of our dialog, edited for size and readability. As all the time, there’s way more within the full podcast, so take heed to and comply with The Grey Space on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, or wherever you discover podcasts. New episodes drop each Monday.
Sean Illing
Inform me why you assume all the pieces’s change into a cult.
Derek Thompson
I’ve all the time been very interested by tradition, which I suppose is price defining. Tradition is the way in which that we take into consideration the world and the way in which that we affect one another’s ideas concerning the world. And that may be via leisure, it may be via faith, it may be via trend and garments, nevertheless it’s the memes and concepts and ideologies that not solely affect our personal sense of actuality however different individuals’s sense of actuality. And I’ve all the time been interested by how individuals’s sense of actuality involves be.
So you can begin with the late nineteenth century when the idea of a nationwide actuality was first attainable, a minimum of in America. You had applied sciences like the phone and the telegraph that allowed newspapers to share info and report on info that really was nationwide. It allowed info to journey a lot quicker than it had ever traveled earlier than. And so instantly within the late nineteenth century, we had the potential for a nationwide and even worldwide real-time shared actuality. And that shared actuality may need come to its fullest expression in the course of the Twentieth century with the rise of tv expertise. You had only a handful of channels that have been reaching tens of tens of millions of individuals.
On the identical time, you additionally had the rise of nationwide newspapers and possibly the apogee of nationwide newspapers by way of their potential to monopolize native promoting income and change into monumental machines for getting tens of tens of millions of People to examine a shared actuality. And so you progress from the nineteenth century with the beginning of this chance of a shared actuality, to the Twentieth century, the place you actually have the rise of a sort of monoculture, which was by no means actually attainable for the overwhelming majority of human historical past.
What I’m interested by is the likelihood that the web has eternally shattered that actuality, that we’re in a method going again to the pre-Twentieth century the place tradition is definitely only a bunch of cults stacked on prime of one another, a bunch of mini native realities stacked on prime of one another.
Sean Illing
How do you outline a cult?
Derek Thompson
I consider a cult as a nascent motion exterior the mainstream that always criticizes the mainstream and organizes itself round the concept the mainstream is unhealthy or damaged in a roundabout way. So I suppose once I take into consideration a cult, I’m not simply eager about a small motion with lots of people who imagine one thing fiercely. I’m additionally within the trendy thought of cults being oriented in opposition to the mainstream. They kind as a criticism of what the individuals in that cult perceive to be the mainstream. And cults, particularly once we speak about them in faith, are typically excessive, are typically radical, are likely to have actually excessive social prices to belonging to them.
As we speak, particularly within the media and leisure area, we have now this actually attention-grabbing recognition of latest influencers or new media makers adapting as their core persona the concept the mainstream is damaged, that information is damaged, that mass establishments are damaged, that the elite are in a roundabout way damaged and elite establishments are damaged. The fragmentation of media that we’re seeing and the rise of this anti-institutional, considerably paranoid type of understanding actuality, I see these items as rising collectively in a method that I discover very attention-grabbing.
Sean Illing
You have been speaking concerning the cellphone and the telegraph earlier, however the factor about newer applied sciences like radio and TV, as an example, is that they helped create one thing like a mass tradition. The general public was kind of watching the identical film we name actuality, and for all of the downsides of that, and there have been many, it did take pleasure in grounding society in a shared actuality. Do you consider that loss as a real cultural and political disaster? Or is it attainable that that is simply one other interval of technological change, not that completely different from earlier intervals and we’ll determine it out?
Derek Thompson
I do assume that in so some ways, we’re simply going again to the center of the nineteenth century. We’re going again to the historic norm quite than being flung into the exosphere, into some unprecedented state of common discombobulation.
The concept a shared actuality, a shared nationwide actuality in actual time, is even attainable is so traditionally younger. Only one fast apart, I used to be performing some reporting for the e book that I’m writing proper now and noticed in an Eric Hobsbawm e book referred to as The Age of Revolutions that when the Bastille fell in 1789, a Canton half-hour away from Paris didn’t understand the French Revolution had occurred for a full month. That was the velocity at which info used to journey. It was the velocity at which a person might experience a horse or stroll subsequent to his horse.
You want a whiz-bang expertise that may someway transmit at one thing just like the velocity of sunshine, definitely one would hope the velocity of sound, info throughout huge distances. You solely had that with the invention of the telegram and the phone, after which later radio.
So if you wish to know the place we’re going, look the place we got here from. Within the nineteenth century, in fact, we had numerous chaos, however we additionally had an American democracy for many years and a long time. So it’s not apparent to me that the erosion of the monoculture or the erosion of the information mainstream is anathema to American democracy.
Sean Illing
I don’t assume it’s incompatible with American democracy as such, nevertheless it could be incompatible with the mannequin of liberal democracy we’ve change into accustomed to since mid-Twentieth century or so, which can also be a historic aberration.
Derek Thompson
You could be completely be proper. That is one place the place the bridge goes too far for me to have a ready-made reply. I’m not precisely certain why a extra riotously antagonistic and fragmented information ecosystem could be perilous to liberal democracy. It’s attainable that it might be, however what’s the causal mechanism by which a wildly fragmented media results in a backlash in liberal democracy?
Sean Illing
I assume I’m eager about how this surroundings creates a collective motion drawback that makes coping with the kinds of challenges we’re coping with at the moment nearly insoluble. Martin Gurri had a helpful metaphor in his 2018 e book The Revolt of the Public. The best way he put it was to say that for a very long time we seemed into the identical mirror of mass tradition and the web shattered that mirror right into a billion little items, which meant that governments might not dictate the tales societies have been telling about themselves, which is a superb factor in numerous methods, nevertheless it additionally produced quite a bit social turbulence.
Derek Thompson
I agree with the concept we’re all wanting into fewer mirrors, nevertheless it’s not apparent to me that the mirrors we have been wanting into have been reflecting actuality. They have been reflecting a model of actuality that neglected quite a bit. The information of the Twentieth century didn’t report on racial justice at something like the extent of high quality that we now anticipate experiences in racial justice to do. The mirrors of the Twentieth century and information experiences of the Twentieth century didn’t, I feel, uncover all kinds of issues of governance that took years to grasp. Didn’t report on the environmental degradation of commercial America within the Nineteen Thirties, ’40s and ’50s. Protests needed to fill the void of media that was under-representing minorities in city America.
None of that is to accuse you personally of overlooking these issues as a result of I’m certain you’d agree with all of them, nevertheless it’s to remind all of us that once we really feel nostalgia for the media surroundings of the Nineteen Forties and Nineteen Fifties, we’re feeling nostalgia for a information media ecosystem that in some ways was inferior to and even blind to the issues that we all know to concentrate to at the moment. And I do assume that in some ways, the fragmentation of the media can generally create competitors that enables us to see behind corners and perceive issues, root out issues that we didn’t see earlier than.
I’m a capitalist general, and I feel that extra competitors in most markets is sweet. I simply assume it’s vital to grasp, as we do in some markets, that there will be detrimental externalities. An enormous gaping detrimental externality of abundance in media is that superabundant media creates a situation the place information entrants really feel like they must be antagonistic. A information surroundings like that’s going to create plenty of mistrust, it’s going to create plenty of disharmony, it’s going to confuse lots of people, and it’ll substitute a world with a small variety of flawed mirrors with a riotous and unthinkable variety of mirrors, a few of that are absolute bullshit mirrors and a few of that are fairly good.
Sean Illing
The issue of “mistrust” is what I used to be getting at. I by no means preferred the phrase “post-truth” as a result of it implied there was a golden age during which we lived in fact. That’s bullshit. So I’m not nostalgic in that method and I’m not making the case that we understood our world higher, or that society was extra simply, when everybody was watching the identical handful of networks or studying the identical handful of newspapers. I’m simply saying that was a interval the place there was extra belief in authority, partially due to this near-monopoly on info on the prime. And when that near-monopoly shattered, individuals might see and listen to extra and that eroded belief in authority, belief in consultants, belief in info. Is {that a} good factor in the long run? Most likely. I don’t know. However I don’t assume our establishments have been outfitted to handle the transition from that world to this one.
Derek Thompson
I feel I agree with plenty of that. What I most wish to maintain down on is the concept nearly all nostalgia for a previous golden age is nostalgia for a world that didn’t exist or a world that we’d discover inexcusably horrible at the moment. If somebody believes that the world of Nineteen Fifties or ’60s was higher on this method, then why didn’t that shared actuality result in a world the place we fastened our issues quicker? Why didn’t a shared actuality extra expeditiously reveal the injustice of Jim Crow and voting legal guidelines earlier than the 1965 Act? Why didn’t it assist us see the horrible issues that we have been doing to leaded gasoline and the air and the water? Why, primarily, was the world of monocultural information so flawed if monocultural information is so helpful for exhibiting the citizens what’s vital on the planet? That’s the query that I really feel like is rarely answered when individuals begin waxing nostalgic concerning the center of the Twentieth century.
To listen to the remainder of the dialog, click on right here, and make sure to comply with The Grey Space on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Pandora, or wherever you take heed to podcasts.
