Only in recent months, with the news of the Russian hacks and trolls, have Americans begun to wonder whether the platforms they previously assumed to have facilitated free inquiry and communication are being used to manipulate them. The fact that Google, Facebook, and Twitter were successfully hijacked by Russian trolls and bots (fake accounts disguised as genuine users) to distribute disinformation intended to affect the US presidential election has finally raised questions in the public mind about whether these companies might compromise national security.
The Undoing Project: A Friendship That Changed Our Minds
by Michael Lewis
We are living in an age in which the behavioral sciences have become inescapable. The findings of social psychology and behavioral economics are being employed to determine the news we read, the products we buy, the cultural and intellectual spheres we inhabit, and the human networks, online and in real life, of which we are a part. Aspects of human societies that were formerly guided by habit and tradition, or spontaneity and whim, are now increasingly the intended or unintended consequences of decisions made on the basis of scientific theories of the human mind and human well-being.
In a pandemic, biodata about a population’s genome is an essential asset for epidemiology, as well as for the development of vaccines and treatments. And for authoritarian states like China and Russia, the accuracy of epidemiological assessments has a special significance in shaping a strategic political response to the crisis—at a time when America’s response to the coronavirus pandemic has exposed its shocking lack of preparedness for a public health emergency. The US president is a fan neither of science, nor of the “administrative state.” His administration is instead committed to “America First” politics.
For Carl Schmitt, laws and constitutions didn’t arise from moral principles. At their basis, there was always a sovereign authority, a decision-maker. US Attorney General William Barr’s defense of unchecked executive authority in his recent speech to the Federalist Society thus had an unpleasant familiarity. Barr’s view is the final reductio ad Schmitt of our political era. As US attorney general, at the head of the Justice Department, he is charged with upholding the rule of law, but he admires only lawlessness in moments of crisis. At these “critical junctures,” which “demand speed, secrecy, unity of purpose, and prudent judgment,” Barr sees the presidency, the vital heart of American power, acting decisively in order to bring a wider reckoning with “final things.”
The Great Hack is an important film, one that people need to see, but its account of the Cambridge Analytica operation scarcely touches the shady world of the billionaire oligarchs who are the real financial and political forces behind the scenes. Perhaps it’s too much to expect a Netflix documentary to accomplish what the special counsel, with all the resources of federal prosecutors and FBI investigators at his disposal, also failed to account for. Although Robert Mueller succeeded in indicting Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, and others, he framed his investigation in such a way that the most significant aspects of what happened in 2016 were judged to be classified counterintelligence threats, about which the public may never learn.
The Snowden phenomenon was far larger than the man himself, larger even than the documents he leaked. It showed us the first glimmerings of an emerging ideological realignment—a convergence, not for the first time, of the far left and the far right, and of libertarianism with authoritarianism. It was also a powerful intervention in information wars we didn’t yet realize we were engaged in, but which we now need to understand. To this day, Snowden speaks often, and uses his platform. So whether we trust him matters. And it certainly matters if we conclude that he is a well-intentioned whistleblower who has shown bad judgment or has allowed himself to become an unwitting pawn of the Russians.