The world, after storm

The COVID-19 pandemic is probably the biggest global catastrophe of the last century, after the Second World War. The magnitude is not given by the number of deaths, but by insecurity and panic, by the economic crisis, by the radicalization produced and by the disinformation campaigns. Infodemia is also global, and has reached the core of liberal democracies - trust in the authorities and even the ability of democratic states to manage the crisis. Alienation occurs not only individually but also collectively - as in the case of any major catastrophe.Would the consequences have been the same if the world had not been connected globally via the Internet? Would the panic have been as deep if it had not been fueled by disinformation and fake news campaigns, conspiracies and theories of deniers?

We are built in "echo chambers", created by constantly feeding our opinions, we live in "filter bubbles", in an intellectual isolation maintained by information engines, we are victims of confirmation distortion, looking only for information that meets our own prejudices. We are radicalizing and the world we live in is becoming more and more polarized. Some would say that this is a consequence of globalization and they would not be very wrong. Others would say that it is a predictable consequence of the birth of the Internet and social networks, and they would not be wrong either; after all, it could be the same thing. The old world, as we know it, is slowly disappearing. The digital ghettos that are rising around us predict a new world. What will be the public space where we, the citizens, will meet? What will be the social bond that will unite us?

The German philosopher and sociologist Jürgen Habermas defined the public space as "the real, virtual or imaginary shared space where social issues are discussed and where public opinions are formed", stating that a healthy public environment is essential for democracy and must be inclusive, representative and characterized by respect for rational arguments.

Habermas has been warning since 2006 that the appearance of millions of chat rooms will lead to fragmentation of the audience into a huge number of public problems and concerns. Since we live only with opinions that validate our own ideas, not accepting those that question them, we give birth to the so-called "digital ethos”.

The citizens of the digital society, the "netizens", as Eli Pariser, an Internet activist, calls them, form self-contained groups, which he called "filter bubbles". Pariser was one of the first to notice that Google's custom search algorithms prevent people from coming into contact with dissenting opinions.

We formed into antagonistic digital tribes that are in permanent confrontation. We create real or virtual connections, especially with people who share the same feelings and opinions as us, because that requires less cognitive effort. This insularity creates the premises for radicalization. Sometimes the movements are taken  to the streets, stirring up revolutions, peaceful or not, and the "outraged" take power an  antagonize digital tribes. At other times, radicalization coagulates only anarchic, conspiratorial movements, fueled by fake news and misinformation. Global warming, vaccines, the current pandemic, white supremacy, etc. antagonizes digital tribes.

The web has abolished the distance between the center and the periphery, which has led to the democratic circulation of falsehood and conspiracies.The Internet has the same ability to legitimize as had the press or television. “Insularity" and "isolationism," as Bruce McComiskey calls them, are the result of the algorithms behind social media that have amplified the proliferation of fake news at staggering rates.

Liberal democracy as we know it is becoming irrelevant before our eyes. New models are proposed - illiberal democracy, authoritarian government and even dictatorship. Some claim that the rise of the populists and the entry of neo-fascist parties into European parliaments are the signs of the new times. The economic crisis caused by the current pandemic is believed to have the same magnitude as the Great Depression in the early 1930sThis has produced very different results on the two shores of the Atlantic - in the US, the Great Depression led to the New Deal in Europe when Hitler came to power.

It is said that the world will not be the same after this crisis. What will be changed? Democratic states seemed weak, but that was because the press was free to show its weaknesses. This  thing has not happened in China or Russia, in Iran or North Korea, but that does not mean that they have managed the crisis better, on the contrary. Mistrust in the state in general, and in authorities in particular will be the greatest test of democracy as we know it in this part of the world. For now, even populist leaders seem to be overwhelmed by the scale of the crisis. Let's see what the world will look like after the storm.