The rise of the Internet and communication devices based activism, slactivism, clicktivism, the use, the abuse and the obtuse.
How often you get invites through social media platforms, to sign up for a campaign, where all you have to do is just click and click and it's done. What do you know about that campaign, the issues and the related information? Does it matter? Who cares, right?
Welcome to the age of Internet Activism... which has other names like slactivism and clicktivism. But what makes it tick, or, click? How do people relate to some of these causes and have them lift their heavy fingers and press the screen to make an intended err... life-altering commitment?
The often accepted explanation is that much of it has to do with ideological self-identification, which, sadly in Malaysia's case, is often related to one's race and/or religious background – often a perfect eco-system to whip out the "victim card". Mind manipulation of the mass is still as easy no different than the early days of tribal religious conversation, that a cry of a "victim" immediately put the peer pressure on the social media users to get into the action without even wanting to know what actually had been transpiring, the history behind it or does it even matter to him or her personally.
There is a study citing that it is usually the narcissist who use plenty of victim card. Popular culture – your religious texts included – glorify the underdog and demonise the powerful ones. It's cool to be an underdog, therefore to related to one, but usually, underdog stories comprise of 70% of the time suffering, 29% fighting back, and only that 1% where you raise the gloved hand in the air to an Eye Of The Tiger soundtrack reprise.
Therefore, identifying oneself to underdogs it is easier now to have the voice heard in unison through the social media, by imposing themselves, with popping veins of narcissism, and use victim cards to make the voices heard or read, (“government is patronising us by eating maggie mee”... “I may not pay taxes, but they can't take away my illegal parking rights!); and it's easier to get support for those whines than, “Hey, let's put our head together on this legislation before we bring it to the parliament”.
But what's the make-up behind the attitude towards these form of activism? Perhaps science can shed a light. Perhaps it may have something to do with...
NPD
Make no mistake...online activism is especially useful for those who are unable to participate in acts of physical activism, notably, as mentioned here, “the disabled and mobility-impaired people who cannot attend marches also find online activism tools a helpful way to promote issues and protest inequalities.”
But there is the selfish side of things that need to be pondered bout. There seemed to be much concern amidst the discerning of us that most of us with a cellular phone, internet connection and social media apps are slowly succumbing to what is known in psychology and related discipline circle as a narcissistic personality disorder (NPD).
Some of the symptoms (taken from the above link) include the following:
- sense of entitlement
- denial
- delusions of grandeur
- grandiosity
- Projection
- need for control
- narcissistic rage
- low empathy
Most of us can tick all the boxes, but let us flesh it out a little bit more on...
NPD and Activism
Some of the most successful activism has its impact all over the world. For example, one of the most important of recent years: “Black Lives Matters”.
The George Zimmerman case in the US, where he was charged for the murder of Trayvon Martin but acquitted, started the peat fire of Black Lives Matter (BLM) hashtag, went on to become a raging online forest fire so much so that it was rewarded with millions of signatures, and even endorsement from celebrities who need to have themselves to be in the public eye radar anyway. Zimmerman was then charged with second-degree murder, instead. BLM collected around US$90 million last year (there's also news about the co-founder of the movement who bought a US$1.4 million house, but that's a tale for a different day).
The same activism was played a big part in the rise of the Occupy Wall Street and Arab Spring movements that relied heavily on social media for the organisation of the rallies, and ballooning up to the size of imposing headlines.
Alas, it is very noticeable that there is clearly the presence of emotional blackmail involved: you are with us or, well, you better be with us, you oppressing, suppressing scumbag. Of course, the "us" is really "me", The whole shebang leads to what is referred to as Performative Activism, which according to the wiki is defined as “referring to activism done to increase one's social capital rather than because of one's devotion to a cause. It is often associated with surface-level activism, referred to as slacktivism.”
Social capital here refers to the network of people we have in our circle, the relationship, work, an interest group, etc. Note how activism now had evolved to selfishness, how many are in our circle, with us.... what cause?
Slactivism and the left-outs
There is a tendency to think that what is trending is the most important stuff going on now, and it will be lost on those who don't give two hoots about it. We can accept that users across the generations who spend up to 99%, if time permits, of their waking hours staring into the screen (including yours truly) will find it endearing to dedicate their seat-burning hours to various causes.
Still, this may not exactly be the case with older generations who are less likely to make their opinions heard. And according to this article, a study by the US Pew Research Center, noted that Americans aged between 18 and 49 are more likely than those aged 50 and over to have used hashtags related to a political or social issue; 20 per cent compared with 8 per cent, respectively.
But not only does online activism tend to engage younger generations more, but it's also naturally attracting a more educated crowd. And those with the communication and technological skills to get their point across would actually able to win the online arguments. All it takes is highlight the "loser's" spelling and grammatical errors and you win the argument.
The older generation though, many without the savviness or patience, tend to gloss over these issues... If wisdom comes with age, then wisdom may also be taking a break during this supposed life-altering choices and decision-making process. One wonders why.
So, are the older folks sidelined? Or does it matter after all, when the voices of the younger generations are going to determine the future... which will be questioned by the latter-day younger punks using the tech of the future to do their own version of activism.
My old fart-ism aside, the Millenials especially are indeed a lot more discerning than what we can give them the credit for. According to this piece, millennials “tend to place less value on the acquisition of things, including the traditional settling down purchases of cars and houses, and more on the acquisition of experiences. When millennials do buy things, they care more about where they came from and what the companies that produce them are like,”
Ethics is a concern, and activism is the best place for the young 'uns to express their concern. But would that do?
Not too far a time ago, a study found that “75% of the Millennial generation uses social media platforms to discuss issues that matter to them. It also found that 58% of Americans think using a hashtag related to an issue is an effective form of support. The problem critics see is that online support isn’t typically backed by actions that make a difference.”
But as sceptical as I am, let's recall one hashtag campaign that was a huge success: remember the #ALSIceBucketChallenge? The ALS stands for Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and the draw was sch that almost nobody knew what ALS exactly was, when they were busy funnelling money to see wet bodies... or, am I being negative? People genuinely cared for the cause, didn't they? Hmm?
Well, it seems half of those who were polled in the UK, for example, never really donated, as reported by The Independent. Yeah, they were in it for the err.. titillation and that's about it, so much for hashtag activism. Let's not forget that there are far more serious diseases, but the funding was directed only at ALS. Perhaps #stripforcancer can generate gazillions, some of which will be siphoned off anyway.
And this sort of hashtag activism also may lead to what the psychologists call Moral Licensing: a form of bargaining to whitewash current bad behaviour with past good ones. In other words, as mentioned here, "...when we are confident we have behaved well in the past, and our actions demonstrate compassion and generosity, we are more likely to explain away acts that are selfish, bigoted, or thoughtless." So, what if I killed a bunch of teens, I participated in the ice bucket challenge. Therefore does it really.....
Help or who cares anymore?
At most, all these activities aim to mainly just raise awareness. That alone does not help. There is more to just collecting a handful of money and shoving it into the safe of a medical facility... On the other hand, the activism of similar nature is just as good in collecting hates and malicious intent, just as fast.
And it also clearly indicates the nature of excitability, where the attention span of an average user is getting shorter and shorter. In turn, hashtag campaigns usually have a lifespan of a housefly. Take, for instance the campaign to save 200 Nigerian girls kidnapped by the Boko Haram group (#BringBackOurGirls) in 2014, millions have been contributed but after seven years, while some have escaped and were released, more than 100 of them are still missing. Most of those who participated must have forgotten the whole fiasco in the following year.
It doesn't help that the ones rescued became some sort of celebrities and their lives just got worst, they had to be protected, and in military or government control all the time.
While these form of activism had in the past also been used for defamation and condemnation, it can affect the leading activists themselves. Noted Internet savant, Aaron Swartz, 26, who at a very young age helped to shape the online stratosphere through his co-founding of RSS ( news feed) and Reddit (social news aggregation)... later committed suicide.
It is a well-known fact that at that time he was plagued by legal problems arising from his aggressive activism. Slactivism does not only has the capacity to hurt others, but also the initiators. Stigmatization, the break-up of relationship over misunderstanding and disagreement on the activism cause are some of the side effects.
Ultimately, everything evolves. There's a half-remembered quote from a film somewhere, where a character says, paraphrased, "governments change, the bullshit remains the same". Whereas, platforms for activism may move from the street to the palm of one's hand, and, in a near future, instructed from the mind itself – wanting a chorus of emotional participation to lift a finger (or press) for something someone thought is important can be both selfless and selfish.
As usual, history will be the best judge. Then, again, history used to be determined by victors... but that would be passe, history will also be determined by armchair cultural revisionist... and they will mostly be stuck at this rampant hashtag slactivism phase, and the sheer exhausting the number will perhaps have them themselves start their own hashtag campaign #stophashtagactivism.
