Written by Himangshu Saikia on 6 February 2021
The world is going through a war of ideologies. This was always the case, though in the present time it is accentuated by social media. Users of social media are exposed only to targeted posts, articles and news - depending upon their location, their ideological standing, cultural upbringing, religious and political affiliations and other personal factors — factors which are tracked via their usage patterns, page visits, likes and dislikes etc. This targeted campaign which initially started as a harmless means of increasing ad revenue, has perhaps unexpectedly, unleashed a sleeping giant — mass human conditioning. Humans are highly programmable. Most of our likes, dislikes, eating habits, preferences for clothing, the media that we like to consume, most of it is just due to our conditioning. So goes the saying : You are free to make your own choices, but your choices are made for you. Hence, in this day and age, where billions of people are increasingly being conditioned by social media using their own conformation biases — it is important to understand whether the ideologies (political or otherwise) that we believe in, have the characteristics to stand the test of time. Consider, the ideology X — which is not against any other ideology, and accepts the fact that multiple ideologies can coexist peacefully. Ideology Y on the other hand, is considered the best possible ideology, one which is better than all others, and have very little chances of evolving into something better. Here are certain resultant characteristics that can be observed in followers of the two ideologies :
Universal Acceptance or the reaching of a conclusion
For followers of ideology X, always reaching a conclusion is unimportant, there need not be any universal acceptance, they can all agree to disagree and be content with no clear answer. This usually leads to slower but more peaceful progress. Followers of Ideology Y, on the other hand, must always reach a conclusion, because a vague or inconclusive result is untenable. It’s either 0 or 1, nothing can be in between. This leads to rapid progress but could result in vehement oppositions and/or violent suppressions.
Universal Tolerance or accepting opinions that do not make perfect sense
Followers of ideology X always showcase universal tolerance, all opinions are heard and sympathized with. A majority opinion is of course considered to move forward, but minority opinions — unpopular ones too — are allowed to exist, and even thrive. Here, everyone is always open to new ideas from anywhere — whether they be functional or not. Followers of ideology Y do not showcase universal tolerance. The best way forward, should ideally be the opinion of the majority. Unpopular opinions are looked down upon, or even promptly crushed. Receptivity to change or the ability to keep evolving Since all ideas have prominence in ideology X, it has the ability to continuously change and adapt to new ideas over time, assimilating within itself, all of the good ideas of the past and present, without any attachment to ideas of one particular era. Ideology Y, which is not receptive to other ideas, can only grow very slowly, and even then, perhaps sub-optimally. It can easily be taken over by other ideologies which become popular, or work better in the present age, as knowledge widens in the global society.
Strength in Diversity
Ideology X finds more strength as its followers grow more diverse, as it can gain from ideas and opinions from multiple different angles. Evolution and growth is certainly very slow in this case, since quick implementations are needed for rapid growth. However, this kind of growth is more sustainable and consistent in the long run. Diversity is a nightmare for followers of Ideology Y, since more varied opinions result in greater difficulty in arriving at conclusions. These societies usually grow very fast, due to their homogeneous nature of thoughts and opinions, and as such, are hampered greatly by differing opinions.
Ease of comparing similarities vs differences
Since many different ideas exist within the X ecosystem, it is easier to look at similarities rather than differences, and feel positive. Suboptimal (read : bad) strategies need not be removed, they are just replaced by better and newer strategies and naturally made obsolete as a result. Thus, the focus is on addition. Within Y, it is much easier to notice difference rather than similarities, since the differing opinion sticks out like a sore thumb. Differing opinions are easier to toss out as opposed to being replaced naturally with time. This may again, lead to violence.
(Meta) Conclusion
From all of the above characteristics, it can be said that followers of X can incorporate followers of Y in their societal fabric easily. However followers of Y would find it extremely difficult to incorporate those of X or from another similar ideology Y* into theirs. Hence, X can be said to be the universal ideology which can stand the test of time, as it will assimilate all Y ideologies into it and coexist within the same eco-system. It is time all of us tried to understand this and ask ourselves, whether the ideologies that we love and support and identify with, have the characteristics of X or Y. Perhaps we would get more clarity from this self-introspection and can have better control over our consistent social conditioning.