Don’t Be a “Slacktivist”
Wife: Come to bed.
Husband: I can't. I am doing something important.
Wife: What?
Husband: Someone is wrong on the internet.
There are few things that are a bigger waste of your time than arguing with people online. We all know this instinctively, and yet so many of us find ourselves regularly taking the bait, picking up our virtual swords, and heading into what we perceive as a digital battle for the heart and soul of our nation. But why?
The internet is a tremendous tool for acquiring knowledge and connecting with others that share our values and beliefs, but it is impersonal and makes it difficult to have the kind of meaningful conversations with others necessary to change a person's mind or at least cause them to consider our point of view. As stated by Mark Manson: "The problem with the internet is that while information is easily conveyed, intention is not. If we’re reading something written by an anonymous person, whether we agree with them or not, we automatically make assumptions about their intentions."
We would never discuss politics face-to-face the way we do online. When we meet, talk, and debate in person, each individual is able to respectfully say their piece, agree on some things and disagree on others, and walk away with a more nuanced and more informed perspective. On the internet, we don't look our "opponents" in the eye, we don’t dare to concede any points, and with Google, we can quickly find what we believe to be convincing information to support any position we wish to defend (no matter how ridiculous) and feel confident enough to declare ourselves experts.
However, few of us are experts on anything, let alone every topic that finds its way into our mainstream political discourse. Unfortunately, though, modern culture expects us to not only to stake out an opinion on just about everything, but it also expects us to have the "correct" opinion and be passionate enough to fall on our sword for it, even if it is something that has little to no impact on our station in life.
“Arguments and debates have no external review. Facts come and go as people find convenient at the moment. Thus, confirmation bias makes attempts at reasoned argument exhausting because it produces arguments and theories that are non-falsifiable. It is the nature of confirmation bias itself to dismiss all contradictory evidence as irrelevant, and so my evidence is always the rule, your evidence is always a mistake or an exception. It’s impossible to argue with this kind of explanation, because by definition it’s never wrong." - Tom Nichols
We get such a dopamine rush from our perception of being right — even amongst people that we've never met, will never meet, and are of no consequence in our daily lives — that we often find ourselves chasing superficial highs from behind the keyboard, rather than impacting real change in the real world. How much time is wasted by conservative activists “owning libs” on Twitter, or by progressive bleeding-hearts “standing in solidarity,” that could be better spent advocating for candidates door-to-door or public policy outcomes at our forum of choice?
Tragically, we no longer encourage individuals to think freely, as any change in opinion is seen as an admitted failure of one’s character, not as personal growth. Worse yet, within our parties, we seek ideological purity to the point where anyone within our camp that does not fall in line perfectly with every aspect of the party’s agenda is seen as a so-called RINO or yellow dog Democrat. We're sadly teaching future generations of Americans to simply regurgitate talking points that appeal to our factions rather than how to think for themselves and form coherent arguments that might persuade others.
It is important to remember that there really is no true political majority in America: liberal or conservative, Republican or Democratic. Save for very rare exceptions, national elections fall close to 50/50 split, decided by a handful of independents with an ever-changing and diverse collection of viewpoints. Whether you are a Republican or a Democrat, your time is better spent fighting to win over these voters than arguing amongst ourselves or with our partisan rivals over minutiae.
So we must ask ourselves, "Why?" Why do we find ourselves caught up arguing amongst ourselves? Why do we find ourselves spending time "correcting" people who are wrong on the internet? Why do we find ourselves falling into the trap of "slacktivism" while smugly believing we're making a real-world impact? Why are we conceding the persuadable middle to engage in online "combat?"
If the answer is because it's something you enjoy, well there's nothing inherently wrong with that. There is value in pursuing hobbies and activities we enjoy. However, if we are falling into the trap because we believe we're making an impact, it's time for us to focus our energies elsewhere because while we're debating faceless avatars, real-world activists are effecting change at capitols, state houses, and city halls around the country.
