The society of indifference

PalmaIndividually, we experience indifference as a lack of interest and motivation towards an object, a person, or a situation. Indifference, understood as apathy, should concern us when it prevents us from continuing with what we had started, with our interests, when it interrupts our emotional connection with others. We must learn to listen to ourselves and be capable of distinguishing when indifference benefits us, when it acts in an adaptive way, as a mechanism that protects us from dangerous and adverse events and situations that cause us pain and represent genuine threats to our emotional balance.

The ancient Stoics, such as Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius, preached selective and wise indifference, they taught how to distinguish what depends on oneself from what does not, and therefore, they invited not to waste energy unnecessarily on solving problems that are beyond our control and that have no solution, such as death. The Stoics thought that the ability to discern what deserves attention was the safest path to achieving serenity, and with it, a happy life. Their indifference did not mean passivity nor did it imply isolating oneself from the world or from politics, but rather it was a proposal that helped to act following the dictates of reason, concentrating efforts on goals that are possible to achieve and on what is possible to change, and thus avoiding falling into discouragement if the expected results were not achieved.

Lack of political commitment

But contemporary indifference has nothing to do with the indifference defended by the Stoics, because it has transcended the individual sphere and colonized society, to the point that we can affirm that we live in the society of indifference. Collective indifference is a symptom, an indication of the lack of political commitment and one of the most harmful evils for democracy, since it leaves the ground prepared for the extreme right to promote apoliticism and anti-politics, conformism and social demobilization.

The generalization of passivity has not been a phenomenon that has developed spontaneously, but is the result of the intentional and persistent action of the most reactionary political forces. The extreme right has known how to understand that indifference is a very powerful political tool, which is bearing fruit in the goal of spreading disinterest in politics, especially among members of the working class. The strategy effectively followed by the extreme right consists of weakening democracy by depoliticizing the citizenry, presenting politicians as a whole as an undifferentiated, corrupt and ineffective mass.

The far-right is successfully contributing to turning politics into politicking: a superficial dispute, with slogans and provocations that prevent the orderly exchange of ideas, reduce politics to a simple struggle for power, and increase citizen passivity.

One of the mechanisms the far-right is using to gain power consists of fostering indifference and passivity, as well as helplessness, convincing citizens that their political influence is nil, that their opinions will not be taken into account, that participating will be of no use, and thus expelling as many citizens as possible from politics, making them perceive that “all parties are the same.” In this way, distrust is generated regarding the ability of parties to solve their problems. This strategy bears a certain parallel with the logic of capitalism to reduce competition and weaken dissenting social bases.

The discrediting of politics is also driving out the working class, which is unconditionally handing over the public sphere to the fascists. We must acknowledge that there are specific moments when some resistance and unease become visible on the part of leftist organizations highly critical of social-democratic policies, with activists who do not feel represented by any political party, and who are not willing to surrender the public space without a fight; but these are isolated, minority interventions without the strength or capacity to alter the prevailing climate of apathy and indolence.

The far-right's way of doing politics is anti-politics, and it is characterized by replacing rational and calm discourse with a narrative of confusion and hatred, which labels political opponents as enemies, stirs up fear of the foreigner, breaks community bonds, and invites the practice of intolerance. It applies a strategy that prevents reflective dialogue and uses shouting, insults, and intimidation to disrupt peaceful coexistence.

The extreme right has built an uninhibited discourse, without any type of ethical or rational limitation, which is not subject to the rules of courtesy or good manners, which discredits and offends, and pursues the symbolic elimination of political rivals, singling them out and intimidating them in their privacy. It is a passionate, emotional discourse, made with the gut and articulated from the most absolute irresponsibility and, at times, anonymity, which blames democracy and institutions for common problems and particular misfortunes.

Rejection of democracy

The goal of the extreme right is to destroy democracy and the welfare state, so that capital may rule, without obstacles or regulations. The success of their plan implies making the citizenry believe that problems have no solution, that politics cannot improve the lives of citizens. The extreme right has managed to create both indifference and rejection towards democracy, grounding the idea that voting is useless, because whoever governs will not change anything. In this way, it has managed to attract anti-system youth disillusioned with conventional politics, who see themselves condemned to live on the street, without a clear horizon for the future. It has also known how to seduce the most desperate citizens who suffer from very precarious living conditions.

Paradoxically, the apoliticism and anti-politics of the extreme right are not affecting it, because the same indolence, the acceleration, the difficulty in distinguishing information from manipulation, and the distracted life have created a great blindness, a kind of invisible wall that prevents identifying contradictions, thinking clearly, and observing the absurdity of asking for the vote while simultaneously denying any legitimacy to the elections and the democratic system.

Be that as it may, it is a fact that the extreme right and its media mouthpieces are winning the battle of ideas by discrediting thought, declaring war on intellectuals, on intelligence and culture, and on philosophy, science, and knowledge. At the same time, it ridicules the feelings of sympathy and compassion towards others, as if they were a sign of weakness and infantilism, when they are some of the natural dispositions that make life in society possible, as the philosopher David Hume showed centuries ago. To combat the extreme right, we must recover the strength of sympathy and demand an education that teaches us to recognize and share the feelings of others.

It is increasingly evident that the society of indifference only benefits fascism, that its growth is linked to the increase in powerlessness and disaffection for politics, and that its victory would not be the simple victory of some citizens over others, but rather it would be the defeat of the very idea of politics, and therefore, it would be the defeat of everyone.