Edward Bing
The broad definition of the word algorithm is “a step-by-step procedure for solving a problem or accomplishing some end.” This term is a perfect metaphor for the process unfolding around the world wherein, step by step, national identity and individual competence are being erased in a process that is implacable and relentless. In some cases, this algorithmic erasure is literal, expressed in every microtargeted image that hits our ubiquitous screens. But whether it’s literal or a metaphor to describe the culture being imposed upon us, our erasure is happening as if it were driven by an algorithm without a soul.
The primary source for the implementation of our erasure is California’s progressive elites. Well before Nvidia took off in Santa Clara and OpenAI opened its doors in San Francisco, California’s influencers, from Hollywood to Silicon Valley, have defined the message and controlled the conduits of communication. From legacy entertainment powerhouses like Disney, Universal, Warner, Paramount, and Columbia to modern communications monopolies like Google, Apple, and Meta, the reach of California’s technology-enabled cultural influence has no precedent and no equal. And the way California is managing it is shameful and dangerous. The consensus among California’s elites, almost all of them progressive liberal Democrats, is to destroy a culture that has inspired individual excellence throughout history.
From the rhetoric of California’s politicians and the agenda-driven, formulaic output of California’s entertainment industry to the biased algorithms informing California’s ubiquitous search engine and social media products, a divisive message is perpetually broadcast to the world. And there is no way to accurately express the foundational essence of that message without being embarrassingly candid. The distilled and unvarnished version goes like this: Straight white men are responsible for the problems of the world, and their power and their culture must be erased.
In many respects, this isn’t news. Since the 1980s, discrimination against white men has been institutionalized in America, with California in the vanguard. But in the 1980s, proportional representation was possible without major disruptions to productivity. Today the population of white males in California entering the workforce is reduced to around 20 percent, turning “proportional representation” into a beast that sacrifices competence for inclusion. Worse, what was once blandly referred to as “affirmative action” has morphed into the far more expansive ideology known as “diversity, equity, and inclusion.”
How the toxicity of DEI in all of its woke permutations has alienated capable white men was captured for me in an email I received from a younger friend who, despite being a California native, has permanently left the state and has no regrets about his decision. He writes:
“Could I succeed there? As much as any white male, which means never escaping being a second-class citizen with a weaker set of rights. I don’t participate in that because I have ideals, like not discriminating on gender except for recognizing natural biological differences, not discriminating on ethnic background besides recognizing the inherent value of cultural continuity, rewarding hard work and competence in competitive open economy, the value of strong cohesive societies. I would sleep on the street before I would be a slave to a system that hates me.”
“A system that hates me.” That’s what we’ve allowed to be inflicted on our native sons.
But to emphasize the marginalization of white men is to overlook the algorithm’s primary objective, which is to eliminate all national identities and all individual competence. It’s not personal. It’s not even racist in its intent, even if it is racist in its application. Elevating people in precise proportion to the percentage at which the group they’re part of appears in the general population, at the same time as the population itself is being demographically transformed to have no dominant group, accomplishes both of these goals. In fact, it makes them necessary.
Once you have an undifferentiated mass of humans reduced to placeholders in every institution of society, AI algorithms must step in to replace competence, at the same time as cultural algorithms must replace what was once authentic and unique with a Disneylandified, lowest common denominator culture designed to enervate and captivate humans who have devolved into Pavlovian automatons. In this sense, for all of its revolutionary potential, AI is just the natural extension of a process that has been underway for decades.
California’s threat to the world isn’t that it is the epicenter of cultural power and computational innovation. The problem with California is that the oligarchy that runs it is committed to turning diverse nations and cultures, exhibiting vastly differing capacities for individual and collective excellence, into totally undifferentiated human matter.
The algorithms of erasure may most explicitly target white men, but all manifestations of excellence are swept up in the purge. Asians, heterosexuals, and biological women are obvious additional targets, but the “disadvantaged” beneficiaries of the algorithms are also destined for erasure. The algorithm seeks to destroy every shred of diversity, whether based on gender, ethnicity, or expressions of individuality and excellence. Whether they are deemed privileged or disadvantaged, they shall be assimilated.
This is what California’s “progressive liberals” seek to impose on the entire world. With cultural imperatives oriented to the “climate crisis” and the “equity” crisis designed to brainwash us into compliance, we are being herded into smaller and smaller pens. To be sure, the algorithms of erasure festoon the pens of our confinement with immersive AI-driven engagement. They deliver perpetual bursts of dopamine while simultaneously destroying our capacity for independent thought or sustained concentration. We are being programmed to be childless, owning nothing, and part of nothing.
The alternative to algorithms is to preserve differentiated cultures and accept individual inequality—not of opportunity, as we must constantly clarify, but of outcome. And there are glimmers of hope. Promoting this alternative are a handful of Californian billionaires who have decided to reject the algorithms of erasure. Notable among them is Elon Musk, but he’s not alone. He is joined by a powerful set of individuals with names that resonate with anyone familiar with the meteoric rise of Silicon Valley power. A partial list includes Mark Andreessen, David Sacks, Joe Lonsdale, Doug Leone, Ben Horowitz, Peter Thiel, and Chamath Palihapitiya; even Mark Zuckerberg is displaying signs of breaking away from the algorithm.
We may hope there is an inherent conflict here that cannot be sustained; the idea that Silicon Valley, where ambitious, ingenious individuals risked everything to turn start-up companies into global behemoths, could align itself with woke Hollywood and, more alarmingly, with a globalist oligarchy bent on conquering the world and crushing the individuality that made them who they are. Perhaps California’s elites have only begun to fracture; perhaps a preference cascade is imminent; perhaps realignment is coming. If so, it will alter the momentum of history in the place where such a tectonic shift might make the most difference.
Things may get very interesting over the next few years. A handful of powerful Silicon Valley billionaires have decided to challenge the algorithms of erasure. For that reason, there is hope.
