I just finished reading Nexus by Yuval Harari having previously read two of his previous brilliant books, Sapiens and Homo Deus. Harari writes about myths, some useful, some harmful. Three such myths are those of money, the nation state and religion. Myths are stories that exist only in people’s heads (religious people are welcome to disagree). Harari claims that myths enable a large number of people to share the same values and work toward a common goal. Myths create order.
I have come to realize that we may look at what’s currently happening in the US and many other places through the wrong lens. What some call an epistemological crisis (see this post) may not be about epistemology at all. It is instead more likely about the construction of a new myth, a new religion, with the authoritarian leader as the myth-teller and the in-myth leader, and with his base as the believers.
The myth may be about immigrants as the source of all sorts of evil, the media as the enemy of the people, of victimhood, and, in case of the US, of being the apex predator country that thanks to its military might can and has the right to invade countries like Denmark at will (the mystery is how an apex predator is also a victim).
The myth is compelling as it gives simple explanations and simple solutions for the suffering of the voters. The myths aligns with type 1 thinking—fast, intuitive, and emotional—rather than type 2 thinking, which is slower, more analytical, and cognitively demanding. This simplicity allows the narratives to spread quickly and stick in people’s minds.
The purpose of the authoritarian’s communication is thus not to tell the truth. On the contrary he often employs a “firehose of falsehood” that erodes trust in truth altogether. In this epistemological vacuum, myths become potent because they provide coherence where facts cannot.
Fact-checking the statements is therefore a meaningless endeavor. They often have no relation to epistemology. What is said is not meant to convey truths but to create a particular type of order to secure a following (and in many cases some pecuniary benefits).
Instead of fact-checking, we should focus on trying to understand what the authoritarian tries to accomplish with the lies; what kind of myth is he building and to what end?