Sunday, September 12, 2021

The Myth of the Red Pill

By Jack Butler

Sunday, September 12, 2021

 

Earlier this week, we got a trailer for this December’s The Matrix: Resurrections, a sequel in the franchise started by 1999’s The Matrix. The first movie’s basic premise — reality is an illusion malevolently forced on us from which we need to be liberated — as well as its action and special effects have helped it earn an enduring place in popular culture. As has its idea of a “red pill,” offered to main character Neo early in the film to escape the illusion:

 

You take the blue pill and the story ends. You wake in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill and you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes.

 

A worldview constructed around the latter choice has grown in recent years on the online right. Despite its tenacity, it remains fundamentally flawed.

 

Even without such a stark scene, The Matrix would bear more than a passing resemblance to the ancient beliefs associated with gnosticism: that reality itself is a war between two competing yet equally matched good and evil forces; that the physical world is a deception foisted on us by evil; that our bodies, being physical, are also a trapping of evil to be resisted; and that true knowledge of all this is achievable only for an elite few. If an idea survives for centuries, then it must have some appeal. Reality can often seem disappointing; heroic self-conceptions can be fun; and imagining oneself as the holder of true knowledge amid the horde of rubes can feel empowering. A digital age in which so much of one’s experience seems to have some degree of remove from reality likely makes this notion even more alluring.

 

How did the red pill go from pop culture to right-wing Internet politics? In an excellent essay for The New Atlantis, Geoff Shullenberger identifies a kind of dual-track origin for the red pill as a political neologism. It seems to have come out of the “manosphere,” which he describes as “an array of misogynist subcultures united around the belief that feminism controls modern culture and men must free their minds of its influence,” around 2009. Contemporaneously, it also popped up in the writings of California computer programmer, neoreactionary blogger, Peter Thiel associateand now Tucker Carlson interviewee Curtis Yarvin. Yarvin, as Shullenberger puts it, “claimed to offer readers an alternative to the propaganda of the ‘Cathedral,’ his term for the complex of state bureaucracies, the university system, and the mainstream media that together prop up liberal rule.” Yarvin’s thought has been promoted by The American Mind, a publication affiliated with the Claremont Institute. In 2019, The American Mind introduced an essay written by Yarvin by calling him “one of the most influential and controversial figures on the online Right” and claiming that “as the political scene across the internet has fragmented with explosive growth, some factions have taken concepts Yarvin introduced — such as the ‘red pill’ metaphor associated with The Matrix — and popularized them, sometimes in unhealthy and extremist ways.” It decided to give him a platform to explain and defend himself and has since featured work by him and other, similar writers.

 

It is hard to determine the true origin, spread, and popularity of online phenomena. But the red pill has become particularly popular for a certain kind of Very Online conservative. The adjective “redpilled” is typically used to describe someone or something that reflects a vague, would-be-novel conservatism positing that most of society is arrayed against its adherents. The redpilled also tend to have a contempt for politics as it is practiced in the real world, preferring instead a complete triumph that requires . . . well, definitely something other than what they believe conservatism has typically resembled lately. You don’t have to look hard to find instances of someone online breathlessly labeling a favored development as “redpilled,” or noting the “redpilling” of someone who apparently accepts their perspective. In fact, this outlook is now so ubiquitous that, as Shullenberger writes, “taking the red pill”

 

occupies a peculiar position in our cultural lexicon: tainted by its association with some of the most widely reviled online subcultures, yet instantly recognizable and infinitely adaptable. The phrase conveys a belief that one is socially marginalized for daring to believe dangerous truths — yet it describes an experience so widespread that almost anyone might deploy it. The red pill has somehow become both culturally central and peripheral, at once a dog whistle and a cliché.

 

It is indeed a cliché — and an ancient one at that. The true believers among the redpilled, like the gnostics before them, imagine themselves an elite sect. Having awoken to what they identify as the truth, they hold others in familiar gnostic contempt. But they must also explain why they see what others cannot. To do so, as Shullenberger writes, they “often end up engaged in something not unlike the Marxist critique of ideology, because they must explain how most average people have been deluded into a ‘false consciousness’ that distorts the true nature of reality.” In this also familiar mode, detractors are reflexively dismissed as hopelessly deceived by the status quo — or, even worse, agents of it.

 

This is not to say the redpilled lack arguments, or sophisticated ideologists among their ranks. Indeed, as Shullenberger notes, “the redpilled tend to find a new authoritative account that replaces the orthodox one and offers a manner of suturing reality back together — a process often reinforced by a newfound sense of being a member of the enlightened few who have walked the same path.” In The Matrix, this came from Morpheus, who offered Neo the O.G. red pill; in our world, it comes from figures such as Yarvin (who, let us remember, is a computer programmer).

 

Adherents believe that their apparent online numbers, purportedly sophisticated ideas, and supposed influence in real-world politics point both to their being correct and the emerging conservative paradigm. All of these things are hard to measure, not just because of the amorphous quality of online interaction, but also because of the many layers of irony and memery in which believers conceal themselves. Still, it is undoubtedly true that none of this would have happened at all without the Internet. This fact is often interpreted favorably: The nature of physical reality, it is claimed, makes the kind of conversation they want to have ever harder, so anything worth saying is now being said digitally.

 

But the Internet is at least as much of a constrictor of thought for the redpilled as it is a facilitator, if not more so. Many of the redpilled think of themselves as possessing a kind of unique energy, unavailable to the rest of the Right. It is quite easy to convince yourself of that if you spend all day marinating in carefully curated digital environments, associating mostly with people who agree with you, and letting your real-world interactions, such as they are, be flavored either actively or passively by your experiences online. Insularity is an ancient human temptation, one the Internet has, surprisingly, exacerbated. Reddit, for example, consists of a series of compartmentalized communities (“subreddits”) designed exactly for this. Yes, you can switch between them . . . or you can stay in one or a handful of similar ones to the exclusion of all others. And from there, you can become convinced, in concert with other like minds, that it is the world, and that those who do not belong to it simply do not understand. Ergo, what you are doing represents a higher reality — once again, the gnostic impulse.

 

A true gnosticism requires not just an elect possessing esoteric knowledge, but also an enemy in charge of the physical world — and an arena for spiritual combat. For many of the redpilled, that world is social media, particularly Twitter. Inspired, no doubt, by former president Donald Trump, and by a misbegotten view that Trump’s tweets were a definitive aspect of his political success, they view this realm as a battlefield, chasing its latest controversies and starting their own. The Internet may have begun with the promise of freewheeling sharing of information and interaction, but in the realm of the redpilled, Twitter is a place for collectivized, digital mass action. Believing that tweets are a serious and desirable form of political activism, they glory in the dopamine rush of likes and retweets, call for ratios of opinions they deem unacceptable, and take all of these things as signs that they are advancing their cause instead of adding tiny bits of ember to a fiery digital hellscape.

 

There are some things worth remembering about Twitter. According to a 2019 Pew Research survey, 22 percent of Americans use Twitter daily. In 2021, Twitter itself measured 199 million daily active users on the site. This sounds like a lot, but only 38 million of those users are in the U.S. (11 percent of our population). By this measure, Twitter’s total active user base is about 2.5 percent of the world’s population. Pew’s 2019 estimate also says that 80 percent of tweets come from 10 percent of users. One study estimates that anywhere from 9 to 15 percent of Twitter users are bots; 66 percent of all links on Twitter come from bots. All of this speaks to a world that is not merely self-referential but also self-reinforcing. It sucks people in, convinces them that it is normal, and then brings out the worst in them as they engage in futile conversations that are hopelessly skewed by unrepresentative samples of human beings and disguised machines.

 

Like much of modern media, Twitter shrinks our attention spans while bombarding us with things we might not otherwise have ever known or cared about and on which we have no influence. This is to say nothing of the political slant of Twitter. As Brian Riedl put it (in a tweet; Twitter has its uses), “Twitter users are D+15 — which would tie HI & VT for the most liberal state . . . the 10% of Twitter users who post 92% of all tweets are D+43 — which would make it America’s 2nd most liberal House district.”

 

This skew can breed, in those who believe it to be representative, a highly agitated and combative posture. It can make them think that America is already lost; this is called a “black pill” (the pill boxes of the redpilled are overflowing). It can make them believe that persuasion and workaday politics are inadequate to the moment, that only desperate action, often involving a departure from the constitutional order necessitated by the one already undertaken by opposing political forces, can bring any hope of salvation. It can make them believe that the political sphere is or should be a source of salvation — if only their enemies can be crushed. And so it can make them believe that only a countervailing force, similarly drawing strength from the online world and sharing many of its opponents’ attributes, can possibly contest it. In this way, the hyperpolarization and acute antagonisms of Twitter feed off each other, require each other, and may in fact reflect each other. Some of what happens on Twitter may be somewhat indicative of the real world. But there’s also the fact that Tay, Microsoft’s AI Twitter account whose personality was formed from Twitter interactions, within a day became a suicidal, sex-crazed, Nazi teenage girl. So much for reflecting reality.

 

All of this points to a central irony, and inescapable contradiction, for the redpilled Neo conservatives. The point of the original red pill in The Matrix was to escape an artificially created digital world. But now, redpilling is a phenomenon that depends on digital interactions. It also deceives its adherents about reality itself, discoloring or even discouraging their existence in the physical world. It is from this key inconsistency that so many of their fallacies flow — not least of which is their compulsive use of online platforms that they deem so pernicious they need to be regulated differently, broken up, or destroyed. Many of us nowadays struggle to restrain our use of technology. But that problem will not be solved by pretending that digital oversaturation is a virtue rather than a vice. Those who have trouble regulating themselves in this sphere make a curious authority for how to regulate it in society.

 

There is nothing magical about the online world. Like tools throughout mankind’s history, it can be used for good or evil ends. Facilitating communication, simplifying access to information — such things have their uses. But the test of something’s verity is not whether it goes viral. And as a digital form of gnosticism, redpilling has plenty of other defects that have weakened its utility. For one thing, as Shullenberger notes, it now exists in a kind of knowing game with its opponents: “The bluepilled regard the redpilled as deluded by misinformation, while the redpilled regard the bluepilled as dupes of the establishment.” Clearly, viewing the world as trapped in a digital binary is a dead end.

 

For another defect, look back to The Matrix. Since the movie’s 1999 release, its two directors have come to identify as trans. Some retrospective analyses of The Matrix, including from its directors, have imputed a transgender message to the film. The red pill itself may have originated from the estrogen-therapy pills of the 1990s, which were red. As an ideology, transgenderism is similarly gnostic, imagining a truer inner self deceived by a false external reality. Transgenderism is something many of the redpilled would disdain. They might consider how much of the intellectual framework their worldview shares with it — or, at the very least, how their gnostic creed is somehow correct when another one has erred.

 

Whatever usefulness the red pill may once have had as a metaphor, it has now become a cliché at the same time that it has become a kind of twisted faith. It does not liberate its believers but rather constrains them, trapping them in digital worlds of their own creation. There are superior forms of conservatism, ones that appeal to reason and to more reliable forms of knowledge and authority. Curious minds would be better served letting the redpilled send themselves down endless rabbit holes, and instead pursue forms of learning and action that have a bit more to do with the world above the ground.

No comments: