SHADES OF ‘BIG BROTHER’

In a recent opinion-piece of mine I cautioned against conflating the concepts of disapproval with hate, which has become a mainstream practice in the liberal media, and, through the process of idealogical osmosis, is rapidly being accepted as the standard thinking modality. Here I wish to point out some of the latent dangers in this approach to public discourse and the dissemination of ideas.

First (in order, not necessarily priority) when disagreement is classed as hate and approval is equated with love, there is created an environment in which approval and being “liked” is more important than truth. Consequently, bad ideas will gain ascendancy over beneficial views simply because they have popular approval. And as someone has accurately stated, bad ideas produce bad results. In the words of the ancient prophet, Isaiah, “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness… (Isaiah 5:20).”

Secondly, when the notion that disagreement means hate and approval means love becomes a dominant or “trending” worldview, it allows for the proliferation of popular but dangerous ideologies by preventing both sides being given equal exposure. This moral and social pathology is then exacerbated when it is “policed” not only by governments but by mega-businesses, such as Facebook or Amazon, resulting in shutting down and denying the public dissemination of “non-trending” points of view. This new phenomenon of thought control by global, private entities adds a new but worrying slide towards the Orwellian dystopia controlled by “Big Brother.”

Equally worrisome is the realisation that such an environment as I am describing, and which is fast becoming the dominant scenario in western nations, plays neatly into the hands of disingenuous and deviant politicians, who wish to control public discourse and free expression of ideas in order that their private agendas and megalomaniac designs may bear fruit.

In conclusion, in the odd chance that some reader may be wondering why such “theorising” as this merits publication, I would simply say that my time is too valuable to deal with social theories, but equally too valuable to not draw our attention to dangerous social and moral trends. The subject matter of this essay is one such danger. (Pastor Alson Ebanks)