In society, a worrying trend is the inclination to find a scapegoat. Often, we prioritize assigning blame over seeking solutions.
This trend is particularly evident in our current political landscape, where debates over fault consume more time and energy than discussions on implementing solutions we largely agree on. Immigration, for example, is an issue where blame overshadows consensus on how to address the problem.
Even proposed solutions to immigration problems are mired in a cycle of inaction that extends beyond just this issue, reflecting a broader pattern of political polarization. Our nation seems united only in recognizing the debilitating effect of this polarization on problem-solving. However, bridging these divides seems beyond our grasp.
One suggestion to combat polarization is to create better incentives for politicians, encouraging them to act in the public interest rather than personal gain. The current incentive structure is clearly flawed, as seen in the case of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, whose disruptive behavior is rewarded with attention and fundraising, despite her lack of productive contributions.
This behavior is symptomatic of a larger issue in our information ecosystem, which fosters intentional bad actors like Greene. The online environment rewards sensationalism over substance, leading to a Congress increasingly populated by influencers rather than effective representatives.
But perhaps the blame for our polarization doesn't lie solely with political actors. What if our preferred communication platforms have inadvertently fueled this divide? Big Tech companies, driven by the profit motive, have created an environment of perpetual disagreement and agreement within ideological bubbles, maximizing engagement while minimizing consensus.
Authors Frank McCourt and Michael Casey argue in their book "Our Biggest Fight" that this state of affairs is not conducive to a functioning democracy. They call for a reimagining of the internet, where users have more control over their data and companies must adhere to user terms and conditions.
This shift in power dynamics, they believe, will deprive tech companies of the ability to manipulate users and undermine democracy. However, achieving this vision requires public demand for change, as well as alternative models like those proposed by Project Liberty, to reshape our relationship with technology.
Ultimately, the status quo is unsustainable. Until we recognize that our current information ecosystem is designed to divide us, rather than unite us, we will continue to point fingers at each other instead of addressing the root cause of our societal divide.