Contemporary populist sentiment in North America is not a simple thread but a Gordian Knot, a complex entanglement of historical threads of anti-elitism, moralism, economic anxiety, and powerful national myths. These currents, born from religious revivals, frontier experiences, and Enlightenment ideals, are now colliding head-on with the reality of our technological dependence. This “Great Collision” exposes a profound tension between the cherished myth of the independent, self-reliant frontiersman – often carrying a gun – and the inescapable technological dependence and interconnectedness of our digital lives, which profoundly shapes our political discourse, social interactions, and the foundation of our communities today.
The seeds of anti-elitism were sown early on during the period of British rule over the American colonies (1607-1776). Colonial grievances stemming from mercantilist policies and a perceived lack of representation fostered resentment towards distant and unaccountable authority. This distrust intensified during the American Revolution (1775-1783), where the rhetoric of liberty, equality, and self-determination fueled a powerful anti-authoritarian sentiment that became a central tenet of American populism.
Contributing to this anti-authoritarian sentiment in North America were the Great Awakenings, periods of intense religious revivalism. The First Great Awakening (roughly 1730s-1740s) emphasized personal religious experience over adherence to established church doctrine, fostering a spirit of anti-elitism and a distrust of established religious authority. This emphasis on individual interpretation and personal connection with the divine laid the groundwork for a broader skepticism of elites and centralized power in secular life as well. The Second Great Awakening (roughly 1790s-1840s) further amplified these themes, and encouraged a growing sense of moral responsibility, often expressed as a desire to purify society and root out perceived moral corruption, frequently targeting established institutions.
These anti-elitist and moralistic sentiments intertwined with powerful national myths in the United States, particularly the myth of the rugged individualist or frontiersman. This idealized figure, often depicted as a self-made man conquering the wilderness through sheer grit, guns and determination, became a cornerstone of our American identity. This myth emphasized self-reliance, independence, and a deep distrust of any force or authority perceived as infringing on personal liberties. Guns, in this context, became potent symbols of this independence, representing the ability to hunt, defend oneself, and resist perceived threats. This image was shaped by the frontier experience, the westward expansion of the United States throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, which demanded resourcefulness and adaptability from settlers.
This myth, however, obscures a crucial historical reality: westward expansion into the wilderness, the very foundation of this myth, was heavily facilitated and supported by the federal government. This government involvement directly contradicts the narrative of radical self-reliance and reveals a complex interplay between individual ambition and centralized power. The federal government played a major role in opening the West:
● Acquisition of Territory: The Louisiana Purchase (1803), a massive land acquisition from France, more than doubled the size of the United States and provided the vast territory for westward expansion. This single act, a clear exercise of federal power, laid the geographical foundation for the frontier myth.
● Land Distribution and Incentives: The government actively incentivized westward migration through various policies. Land grants were given to railroad companies, enabling them to build transcontinental railways that connected the East and West, making travel and trade significantly easier. These same railroads were also granted vast tracts of land alongside their routes which they then sold to settlers. The Homestead Acts (beginning in 1862) offered free land to settlers who agreed to live on and cultivate it for a set period. These acts, while promoting individual land ownership, were a direct intervention by the federal government in land distribution and settlement patterns.
● Resource Management and Legal Frameworks: The government also established legal frameworks for managing resources in the West. This included granting grazing and mining rights on public lands, encouraging resource extraction and economic development. In the arid regions of the West, the government played a crucial role in defining and enforcing water rights, a complex legal issue that required centralized authority and regulation.
● Military Protection and Displacement of Native Populations: Perhaps the most significant, and often overlooked, role of the federal government was providing security and military involvement in Indian Wars. The U.S. Army forcibly displaced Native American tribes from their ancestral lands, clearing the way for white settlement. This often violent and unjust process opened the door to westward expansion.
This extensive government involvement directly challenges the notion of the self-sufficient, self-reliant, rugged individualist operating independently. While individual frontiersman and settlers certainly demonstrated courage, resilience, and hard work, their efforts were enabled and supported by federal policies, infrastructure, and military power. The myth of self-reliance, therefore, becomes a selective interpretation of history, downplaying the crucial role of centralized authority in shaping the American West. This historical amnesia is a key component of contemporary populist sentiment, which often expresses a deep distrust of government while simultaneously benefiting from its past actions. This contradiction is a crucial point to reflect on in the broader narrative of the "Great Collision."
These historical currents now encounter the defining characteristic of our age: technological dependence. This dependence creates a stark contrast with the cherished myth of the independent frontiersman. Today, we are reliant on complex technological systems for everything from communication and information access to banking, commerce, and even social interaction. Digital platforms mediate our relationships, algorithms shape and control our online experiences, and our digital identities become increasingly intertwined with our real-world lives. This dependence creates a profound tension with the myth of self-reliance. How can one be truly independent when reliant on digital networks, online banking systems, and all kinds of digital platforms and technology infrastructures controlled by powerful tech corporations?
This tension fuels contemporary populist sentiment in several ways. The distrust of centralized power, historically directed at governments and large established institutions, now finds new targets in Big Tech. These corporations, wielding immense influence over information flow and personal data, are perceived as modern-day incarnations of the restrictive forces the frontiersman sought to escape. The algorithms that curate our online experiences, the data collection practices that track our every move, and the spread of misinformation through social media all contribute to a sense of unease and a feeling of being manipulated by unseen forces.
The myth of the self-made individual also takes on a new dimension. While technology offers unprecedented opportunities for innovation, it also creates new forms of economic inequality. The gig economy, characterized by short-term contracts and freelance work, while promising independence and flexibility, often leaves workers with precarious employment and limited benefits. Automation, driven by technological advancements, fuels anxieties about job security and the future of work, exacerbating the economic grievances that underpin populist sentiment. The promise of technological advancement, rather than delivering a universally shared prosperity, seems to be widening the gap between the highly educated, tech-savvy elite and those left behind, reinforcing the “us vs. them” dynamic central to populist thought.
The populist emphasis on “common sense” and distrust of experts is further complicated by the complexities of technology. In a world saturated with information, discerning credible sources from misinformation becomes increasingly difficult for everyone. Nefarious or misguided actors often capitalize on this confusion, promoting narratives that reject scientific consensus or established knowledge in favor of “gut feelings” and conspiracy theories. The echo chambers of social media amplify these narratives, creating filter bubbles where individuals are only exposed to information that confirms their existing beliefs, further polarizing public discourse.
The more recent populist adoration of mega-wealthy "tech bros" presents a key paradox. While these entrepreneurs are often portrayed as embodying the self-made man myth, their success was supported by an immense start-up ecosystem that included investors, technology partners, educational institutions, legal, economic, and other financial systems. The facts reveal a story less about self-sufficiency, and more about the value of vast supportive ecosystems and dependencies. These contrasts create tension between the myth of self-sufficiency, and reality.
Furthermore, in our fast changing technology-based world, deeper levels of technological expertise and reskilling are constantly required to keep up and succeed in our digital and modern economies. This leaves those on the outside feeling left behind, alienated, powerless, and economically insecure. It amplifies their distrust of experts and institutions, fuels a search for simple solutions and scapegoats, and evokes nostalgia for a simpler past. This experience of technological exclusion directly reinforces the core themes of populist sentiment: amplifying distrust of elites, and exacerbating economic anxiety that fuels the “us vs. them” mentality.
Added to this complex mix are the modern "culture wars" surrounding issues like LGBTQ equality, modern vs. traditional societal norms, women's reproductive rights, and evolving gender roles to name a few. These issues are often framed as a battle between "traditional values" and a "liberal elite," further exacerbating existing divisions and fueling populist resentment. They become powerful rallying cries, reinforcing the "us vs. them" dynamic, and connecting to deeper anxieties about social change, loss of control, and loss of access to the idealized world of the past.
The “Great Collision” between the myth of the independent frontiersman (and his guns) and the reality of technological dependence, amplified by historical legacies and modern cultural conflicts, creates a profound cognitive dissonance. This dissonance fuels anxieties about control, autonomy, and the future of individual liberty in an increasingly interconnected and technology dependent world. The very tools meant to connect and empower individuals can also become instruments of control, surveillance, and manipulation, exacerbating existing anxieties and fueling populist sentiment.
This collision leaves us with several major unresolved philosophical conflicts:
● Individualism vs. Interdependence: How do we reconcile the cherished ideal of individual independence, often symbolized by gun ownership and rooted in the frontier myth, with the reality of our deep reliance and dependence on complex technological systems, global networks, and the interconnectedness of modern society? The historical reality of government support for westward expansion further complicates this, revealing the myth of self-reliance as a selective interpretation of history.
● Freedom vs. Algorithmic Control: How do we ensure that technology serves individual liberty rather than eroding it through surveillance, manipulation, and the creation of echo chambers?
● Self-Reliance vs. Technological Dependence: How do we maintain a sense of self-sufficiency in a world where we are increasingly reliant on specialized knowledge and complex technological infrastructure? How does this dependence impact our sense of agency and control over our own lives?
● Trust in Experts vs. Distrust of Elites: How do we distinguish between legitimate expertise and the perceived self-serving interests of elites, particularly in the context of complex technological, scientific, and policy debates? How does the rapid pace of technological change affect our ability to evaluate expertise and make informed decisions?
● Local vs. Global: How do we balance the desire for local autonomy and community, with the interconnectedness of the global digital world? How do we navigate the tension between local identities and the homogenizing forces of globalization and technology?
● Technological Progress vs. Social Equity: How do we ensure that technological advancements benefit all members of society, rather than exacerbating existing inequalities and creating new forms of exclusion? How do we address the economic anxieties and feelings of displacement caused by automation and the changing nature of work?
● Tradition vs. Modernity: How do we navigate the tension between adherence to traditional values, often rooted in religious beliefs and historical myths, and the acceptance of evolving social norms, particularly in areas like gender roles, LGBTQ+ rights, and reproductive rights? How do these cultural conflicts intersect with anxieties about technological change and the erosion of familiar ways of life?
These unresolved conflicts represent the core challenge of our time. They are not easily resolved, as they touch upon deeply held values, historical legacies, and complex technological realities. Simply "cutting the Gordian Knot," as Alexander the Great did, is not a viable solution. Instead, we must engage in a careful and nuanced examination of these tangled threads, acknowledging the complexities and contradictions inherent in our current situation. This requires:
● Critical Examination of Myths: We must critically examine the myths that shape our understanding of ourselves and our history, recognizing their power while also acknowledging their limitations and potential biases. We must acknowledge the government's role in westward expansion and the contradictions inherent in the myth of the self-reliant frontiersman.
● Increased Technological & Digital Literacy: We must promote greater technological and digital literacy, and critical thinking skills to empower individuals to navigate the digital world effectively and resist manipulation and misinformation.
● Open and Honest Dialogue: We must foster a culture of open and honest dialogue about the challenges and opportunities presented by technology, avoiding simplistic solutions and engaging with the complexities of these issues.
● Policies that Promote Equity and Inclusion: We must develop policies that promote greater economic equity, access to technology, and social inclusion, ensuring that the benefits of technological progress are shared more broadly.
Navigating this Gordian Knot requires a critical examination of our cherished myths, a greater understanding of the complexities of technology, and a renewed commitment to fostering a society that balances individual freedom with collective responsibility and community thriving. This is the central challenge of our time: to reconcile the ideals of the past with the realities of the present and build a future where technology empowers, rather than diminishes, the individual.
*I use generative AI to assist in all my work.
************************************************************************
Kevin Benedict
Futurist at TCS
View my profile on LinkedIn
Follow me on Twitter @krbenedict
Join the Linkedin Group Digital Intelligence
***Full Disclosure: These are my personal opinions. No company is silly enough to claim them. I work with and have worked with many of the companies mentioned in my articles.
No comments:
Post a Comment