Ignorance and Anti-Knowledge: A New Identity Movement
Written on
One of the peculiar aspects of influencers within the male-dominated realm is that their followers often refuse to acknowledge their roles as influencers. Whether it's bodybuilders, conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones, or those selling health supplements and get-rich-quick schemes, all these figures wield influence, yet their audiences tend to deny it.
This creates an unusual dynamic where such channels and figures gain excessive sway over their followers. Instead of viewing their content as mere entertainment, audiences accept the messages from these social media platforms as absolute truth.
The YouTube channel What I’ve Learned exemplifies this phenomenon, promoting poorly conceived conspiracy theories packaged in a visually appealing format that resonates with frustrated and disillusioned men. The creator of this channel has criticized a range of topics, from vegetables to the connection between climate change and meat consumption.
To clarify, methane, which is released from cattle farming, is a significant factor in global climate change. While methane constitutes about 16% of total greenhouse gas emissions, it is far more potent than carbon dioxide (CO2). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) assigns a Global Warming Potential (GWP) rating to various compounds, with CO2 serving as the baseline at 1. Methane, on the other hand, has a GWP between 28 and 36.
To effectively address the climate crisis, we must confront the global agricultural practices contributing to it. Yet, What I’ve Learned promotes a narrative that directly contradicts this necessity.
Rather than acknowledging the role of meat consumption in climate change—a consensus supported by leading scientific organizations—the channel advocates for a “carnivore diet” that consists solely of meat. They frequently highlight fringe doctors and scientists who challenge established scientific consensus, presenting these outliers as credible sources. This leads to a widespread decline in factual knowledge.
Not only does this channel obstruct collective efforts to combat climate change, but it also actively exacerbates the situation. A cursory glance at their content reveals a consistent theme of intentional disinformation.
The channel has also targeted psychiatric medications, further stigmatizing mental health care by suggesting that people can simply “eat right and exercise” to resolve their issues. This viewpoint is detached from the realities faced by those struggling with mental health conditions.
This channel is just one among many that fundamentally oppose science and knowledge, undermining crucial issues like climate change, while simultaneously promoting harmful misconceptions about consumption and scientific medicine. Their disinformation threatens to erase the scientific progress achieved over centuries.
The situation is exacerbated by the fact that this channel boasts 1.8 million subscribers, individuals who absorb the disinformation as if it were gospel. This presents a significant challenge.
The issue at hand is more profound than just being misinformed; these individuals take pride in their ignorance. They form identities around their rejection of factual information.
Ignorance as a Movement
In my youth, rebellion often involved superficial expressions like wearing unconventional clothing or hairstyles. Back then, it was about challenging societal norms without undermining the very foundations of knowledge.
Rebellion, as a tradition, has always existed, but never before has it transformed into a movement aimed at dismantling the institutions of knowledge that underpin our society. This has evolved into a brand of anti-knowledge, where individuals seek to undermine scientific consensus and well-established theories supported by robust evidence.
The shared narrative among these anti-factual advocates often stems from a place of pain and anger, leading them to reject reality entirely. Their approach resembles a child throwing a tantrum, declaring, “If information doesn’t validate me, I will destroy it.”
Typically male, these individuals, frustrated by life's challenges, turn against the very epistemological structures that define collective knowledge. The shared pool of information serves as a constant reminder of their perceived shortcomings, prompting them to shatter this mirror to escape societal pressures.
These disillusioned individuals have formed various movements—ranging from Pickup Artist groups to INCELs, and even anti-vaccine and flat-earth advocates. Some of these movements pose serious threats by obstructing efforts to address global issues like climate change and pandemics, all to maintain their convictions without accountability.
In essence, these individuals reject responsibility—a sentiment I can relate to from my own youth.
Historically, various countercultures have expressed disdain for responsibility, but there’s a crucial difference: we challenged values rather than facts. Values are often arbitrary traditions, whereas facts—such as the Earth’s rotation around the sun—are immutable truths.
Encouraging angry individuals to dive into disinformation is radicalizing them, creating a collective that perceives their surrounding society as a façade.
The destructive force dismantling our institutions is a profound blend of incompetence and ignorance. Weaponized incompetence refers to the act of feigning ignorance to evade responsibility. For instance, if someone claims they can’t do the dishes simply because they “forgot” how, that’s a classic case of this concept.
Weaponized Ignorance
What we witness today is weaponized incompetence on an unprecedented scale. These anti-knowledge proponents not only refuse to accept responsibility for global challenges but assert that these problems do not exist.
Imagine asking someone to do the dishes, and they not only claim ignorance but insist, “We don’t even have dishes,” while a mountain of dirty plates lies nearby.
This extends to broader issues, such as climate change, where individuals deny the existence of the problem altogether, choosing to emit greenhouse gases freely. This pattern echoed during the COVID-19 pandemic, where many opted for denial rather than contributing to solutions.
This dilemma is a hallmark of the Information Age, where irresponsibility can have lethal consequences. Are we prepared for this? We must recognize that the era of figures like Trump is just the beginning, as technology allows anyone to voice hateful disinformation and find an audience willing to consume it.
The potential for more figures like Trump—varying in their approach but equally destructive—looms large. Our existing legal systems are ill-equipped to deal with these emerging threats in a world where negligence can be as harmful as outright violence.
The tragic truth is that if we fail to regain control over our information landscape, these social contagions will proliferate, dismantling our institutions and dragging us deeper into a post-truth era, exacerbated by the climate crisis that these detractors refuse to acknowledge.
Thank you for reading. If you found this piece engaging, you might also appreciate the following article. If you haven’t signed up for Medium yet, consider doing so for access to countless writers like myself, and I’ll receive a small benefit if you do.
Twitter | Newsletter | Buy me a Coffee