Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Rebuilding Democracy in the Age of Brain Rot

Opinion

Rebuilding Democracy in the Age of Brain Rot
person using laptop computer
Photo by Christin Hume on Unsplash

We live in a time when anyone with a cellphone carries a computer more powerful than those that sent humans to the moon and back. Yet few of us can sustain a thought beyond a few seconds. One study suggested that the average human attention span dropped from about 12 seconds in 2000 to roughly 8 seconds by 2015—although the accuracy of this figure has been disputed (Microsoft Canada, 2015 Attention Spans Report). Whatever the number, the trend is clear: our ability to focus is not what it used to be.

This contradiction—constant access to unlimited information paired with a decline in critical thinking—perfectly illustrates what Oxford named its 2024 Word of the Year: “brain rot.” More than a funny meme, it represents a genuine threat to democracy. The ability to deeply engage with issues, weigh rival arguments, and participate in collective decision-making is key to a healthy democratic society. When our capacity for focus erodes due to overstimulation, distraction, or manufactured outrage, it weakens our ability to exercise our role as citizens.


The Collapse of Civic Thought

Those old cartoons about how the internet ruins our attention spans were once funny, but technology has quietly and profoundly altered how we think and interact with the world. Social media rewards speed and emotion, valuing reaction over reflection. In this environment, sustained attention and thoughtful analysis have become rare skills. The overwhelming volume of content fractures our focus, making it harder to process complex ideas or engage in meaningful dialogue. As nuance gives way to outrage, the space for deliberation shrinks, and public discourse suffers.

We’re drowning in an ocean of information and struggling to make sense of it all. People don’t know which sources to trust, civic knowledge is slipping, and news feeds become background noise. The problem isn’t data—it’s how to think. When emotion replaces understanding in public debate, public life spirals into outrage and distraction.

The Politics of Cognitive Decline

Bad actors have learned to weaponize this situation. The erosion of critical thinking makes manipulation easy. Politics becomes performance—presidential decrees, culture-war theatrics, and partisan spectacles dominate while genuine policymaking disappears.

Take, for example, the extended recess called by House Speaker Mike Johnson during the longest government shutdown in history. Instead of negotiating to end the crisis, the House abstained entirely from governing, leaving even Republicans anxious (Politico, October 9, 2025). Johnson’s decision prioritized optics and posturing over the hard work of legislating. The Founders envisioned a republic of educated citizens making informed political choices. Instead, we have a politics consumed as entertainment, and demagogues thrive in the confusion.

“Brain rot” isn’t just a symptom—it’s a strategy for a political system drifting toward authoritarianism. It dulls public resistance and normalizes authoritarian behavior.

It starts with the president himself. His rise is rooted in the social media pathologies previously noted. Outrage-driven engagement and short attention cycles comprise his political brand. Each Truth Social or X post, feud, or headline reinforces a feedback loop in which spectacle drives support and policy fades further into the background.

Rebuilding the Cognitive Commons
There’s no going back with technology, and with AI’s rise, misinformation will only spread faster. But the war isn’t lost. Rebuilding democracy requires reviving the capacity to think freely and collectively—and that begins with education.

Technology and AI amplify misinformation, but democracy can be rebuilt through education. Fortunately, there are role models for reclaiming our attention. Illinois pioneered media literacy requirements in public high schools (Illinois Law), while California integrated digital literacy across core subjects (California Law). Beyond the U.S., Finland sets a global standard by teaching students, from the earliest grades, how to recognize propaganda and resist manipulation—skills embedded throughout its national curriculum (Media Literacy Index; Finnish Curriculum).

If Congress were functioning normally, it could reinforce state efforts by tying Title I and Title II funding to evidence‑based media‑literacy and civic‑reasoning standards, requiring school districts to report progress similar to math and reading scores, and expanding Department of Education grants for civics innovation labs—local partnerships that teach students how to verify claims, evaluate evidence, and understand how misinformation spreads. These reforms would help rebuild the cognitive tools on which democracy depends.

These reforms prioritize debate, logic, and media literacy over rote learning and ideological conformity. They provide models for teaching people to evaluate competing claims, spot manipulation, and engage in reasoned disagreement—skills essential for democratic citizenship that are fast disappearing from classrooms. Too often, high schools and universities emphasize technical mastery at the expense of civic understanding. We must give equal value to both in the education process.

Renewal Through Reflection

Democracy today resembles the brain of someone in recovery: overstimulated, fatigued, and searching for clarity. Renewal will not come from AI or political saviors but from our decision to reclaim our collective attention from those who profit by dividing it. In a world built for distraction, the most radical act is to listen, reflect, and think for ourselves.

Bottom line: The cure for our societal brain rot requires us to practice vigilance together, to question constantly, and to summon the courage to think clearly even when confusion is easier. Governments can help with this project, but ultimately it is a decision each one of us must make for ourselves.

Robert Cropf is a Professor of Political Science at Saint Louis University.


Read More

 In an aerial view, the Stargate Oracle AI data center campus.

In an aerial view, the Stargate Oracle AI data center campus is seen on August 26, 2026 in Abilene, Texas

Brandon Bell/Getty Images

Is AI Worth the Cost to Communities?

Picture a family living on a quiet street in an idyllic small town. Then a data center moves in next door. Trees are knocked down for a sprawling industrial campus, an enormous windowless building rises, and a maddening hum continues day and night. The family closes its windows, abandons the backyard, and struggles to sleep. Open space disappears, electric bills rise, and the company announces plans to expand—all in the name of jobs, tax revenue, and so-called progress.

While the family is fictional, its experience is not. Across the country, communities are confronting noise, rising electricity demand, water consumption, lost open space, and data centers approved with little public discussion. These costs raise a question the technology industry would rather avoid: Are the promised benefits of the artificial-intelligence boom worth what communities are being asked to sacrifice?

Keep ReadingShow less
aerial view of an AI data center.

In an aerial view, the Stargate Oracle AI data center campus is seen on August 26, 2026 in Abilene, Texas. The Stargate Oracle AI data center will span roughly 4 million square feet and will be operated by Oracle for OpenAI. The facility is the first Stargate site to go live and is expected to be fully completed by the end of 2026.

Brandon Bell/Getty Images

Why Communities Nationwide Are Halting AI Data Centers

More Americans of all political stripes are growing anxious over the impacts of artificial intelligence (AI) and digital technologies, and a popular backlash is brewing. At university graduations, commencement speakers who have cited the alleged benefits of AI have been met with resounding boos from graduates who feel AI has displaced them from jobs. With no federal law regulating AI, all 50 state governments have proposed measures to regulate everything from employment algorithms to deepfakes to child safety.

Lately, the strongest protest has emerged in America's heartland, with one issue fueling local opposition: the rapid proliferation of massive data centers used for cloud storage and artificial intelligence computations. Across America, more than 4,400 data centers currently exist, and a University of Michigan report found that just one center can consume as much electricity as 2,000 homes. They also use large amounts of water for cooling, with a typical data center using 300,000 gallons of water each day (about the same as 1,000 households). But very large data centers can use an estimated 5 million gallons of water each day, which is similar to the daily usage of a town with 10,000 to 50,000 residents.

Keep ReadingShow less
Back view of crop anonymous female talking to a chatbot of computer while sitting at home

AI chatbots and online therapy promise easier mental health care, but technology may be eroding the boundaries, privacy and human connection that make psychotherapy effective.

David Espejo/Getty Images

Big Tech’s Solutions to Mental Health Bring Bigger Problems

While America is suffering a mental health crisis, the good news is that tens of millions of people are getting help. In 2023, 60 million adults reported having sought counseling or treatment in the previous year, and the numbers continue to rise.

Psychotherapy works because of what’s known as the therapeutic frame, a set of boundaries that create safety and structure for patients and clinicians. Sessions last 50 minutes. Fees are agreed upon prior to the start of treatment. The therapist remains neutral, shares little of their personal life, and holds confidentiality sacred.

Keep ReadingShow less
A New Standard for Ethical Immigration Reporting
people holding flag of U.S.A miniature
Photo by Frank Kastle on Unsplash

A New Standard for Ethical Immigration Reporting

Seven months ago, I attended the first day of my Reporting on Race class at USC. Taught by journalist and immigration reporting expert Jean Guerrero, the course offered growth I hadn’t yet imagined, showing me how much I could evolve as a journalist in just one semester.

For the next five months, I researched and reported on an immigration story of my choosing. I wrote about how educators in Los Angeles protect and advocate for students and communities living in fear of ICE deportations. These educators organized community street patrols to keep their neighborhoods safe. Finding sources and producing the final draft took months, but it was one of the most rewarding experiences of my journalism studies so far.

Keep ReadingShow less