I like to think it's a specific kind of schismogenesis called the "Whiplash Effect." Which is to say, when bullies are challenged, and when they are losing that's when they double down and bully harder and harder. An ultimately futile effort, but characteristic of all positive social change. When you tell a child "no" who's been raised without anyone doing that, they will scream like you're ripping their heart out of their chest, or like they'd wish to do so to yours. Then they'll stop, because it isn't working.

But maybe I'm too optimistic. The cynic in me says that the elites have planned their whole lives elaborate plots of how to scream like angry babies the moment there is the slightest resistance, to ensure no one ever even starts to escape their web of debt. Raging against a change they can't stop, or cold, calculating, strategic disruption?

Social media platforms may not have been invented to whip up angry mobs (but in hindsight that seems plausible). But like Bain in The Dark Knight Rises, their owners now realise how politically useful angry mobs can be in defending their 1%er political-economic interests. So they have no incentive to redesign them for more pro-social purposes, and most of then ideologically oppose democracy anyway.

DataFarming platforms cannot be reformed. They must be burned to the ground, and replaced.

(2/2)