How to Bell the Cat?

 The Wisdom of Crowds

Anindya Bhattacharya

 

Before testing Covid+ when Donald Trump apprehended that mail-ballots in the Presidential election would be rigged and thus he would not transfer power in case of his defeat, in the backdrop of the most-pampered US democracy the onus most probably goes to ‘we the people’, often treated at some quarters as ‘crowd’. The possible reason may be that, such a threatening attitude prevails among the people as well, for reason whatsoever, due to all kinds of logic and decency (rather the basic tenets of maintainability of practical democracy) largely waning away. This was the similar situation before the break of WWII when Nazis and Fascists had usurped power through popular mandate in Germany and Italy.

Therefore, the pertinent question is: do such situations arise and are we capable of overriding it this time?

Yes, when the canard of so-called democracy is exposed and faith in the gospels of free market and liberal politics proves to be a misnomer, more precisely, when the desperate cry for humanity loses its passion, the elements of hatred and disbelief rule the roost. This has exactly happened in the present decade, when the crash in the financial market in 2008 demystified the glory of globalisation and neo-liberalism. Along with, the rapid technological development in the 1990s with a major shift of the economic activities towards ICT and Artificial Intelligence in the backdrop of internet-induced virtual globalisation spurred the prevailing socio-economic inequality to a new height. Massive job losses in the traditional sector with rising inequality and uncertainty across the world created a massive discontent and unrest which by coalescing with the crack in the financial market took a neo-right turn. The imperative emerged as: for all shocks and sufferings the migrants were to be blamed, for all economic hardships free trade was to be impugned, ‘necessary evils’ needed to be identified (blacks, muslims, sub-castes et al) and an ethos of neo-nationalism to be construed. For that matter, hatred of the majority and by the majority but for the minority can be the only option to nudge for such a violent erection.

Just have a glance at post-2010 developments: the neo-right forces across the globe gathered steam from the collapse of the liberal economy and polity and built up their newer notions of conservatism. From US to India, and UK to Brazil- the varied colours and tones of conservatives knitted the hatred and frustrations of the masses to ride over power. To peek at it from the other end, it was the ‘wisdom’ of the crowds as well, which chose conservatism and fundamentalism as an option for better living. By then, liberals had their notions overrated and stereo-typed: political rhetoric against casteism and racism, ritual praise of feminism and globalisation and above all secularism, too created a deprived and oppressed ‘other’ in manifold situations across the countries. As in our country, the struggle against ruthless casteist system created in parallel a new form of casteism under the Yadavas and parties like BSP. To stop migrants, states like Andhra Pradesh, Telengana, Madhya Pradesh and few others have enacted laws guaranteeing jobs to the ‘sons of the soil’ in all sorts of employment. Feminism sometimes degenerated into innocent male bashing to achieve personal gains. Globalisation to a large extent indeed hampered the indigenous initiatives. And secularism too often sunk into a kind of biasness shown to some particular religious groups. So, as an obvious reaction, there ensued a different kind of stirring within the society which culminated in today’s conservatism. In fact, the crowd always had its own way of understanding.

In the meanwhile, emergence of ‘social media’ and its manipulative power changed the social settings in a much wider manner. Earlier, the dissent voices were discreet and in most of the time ineffectual. Social media purposefully amplified it and gradually emerged as a mass platform. But most importantly, these corporates and their machine language and algorithm had some other stuff in their minds. They envisaged profit from all the human reactions and gestures. And it was clear, profit would flow if all such retorts act as stimulant. So, they just ignited the passions of the crowd. If a hate post increased their ads and profit then they would rather try to multiply its visibility in all traits. In a way, it is the mood of the crowd to which social media reciprocates, just to fill up its coffers. Some argue the mood of the crowd is constructed by the rulers; better to say, there prevails a complex relation between the wisdom of the crowds and the decrees of the rulers. Recent trends of Modi’s ‘Mann ki Baat’ acquiring more ‘dislikes’ than ‘likes’ is a pointer to the fact that the crowd may too evolve its own wisdom in a disproportionate situation.

No doubt, one can ascertain that in a democratic milieu the crowd has now an edge better than earlier times. Though, it is not clear whether that improves the quality of life altogether. Rather, data show that the life has become more miserable and hateful nowadays, living conditions in gig economy tend to deteriorate to worse, if not worst. Covid19 has made the situation more precarious. Of course, wisdom of crowds realises its pain and sufferings. But whether they can retaliate on time and effectively, that depends on lot of other varied and subtle factors. The fact is: be it conservative or liberal, the wisdom of crowds allows nobody a free lunch.