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

Vote Badge with Rising Social Media Like Icons and Hearts – Digital Engagement and Online Voting
J Studios / Getty Images

Democratic Autopsy and AI

After every defeat, organizations conduct autopsies. The good ones are honest, like NASA’s Rogers Commission report after the Space Shuttle Challenger exploded shortly after takeoff. In addition to identifying the infamous O-rings as the proximal culprit, it looked at organizational culture, communication failures, normalization of risk, management pressures, and institutional blind spots. The best ones are uncomfortable, and make a serious effort to understand “why did we mess this up so badly?” I’ve personally seen both good “autopsies” and bad ones throughout my decades of experience in true life-or-death realms: the SEAL Teams and as an Emergency Medicine physician.

Following the 2024 election, the Democratic National Committee produced a lengthy report titled Build to Win. Build to Last. Yet it is not a serious document because it does nothing to prepare for the unstoppable and very near future staring us right in the face. It is nearly 200 pages long and attempts to explain what went wrong and how the party should prepare for the future. It discusses organizing, communications, coalition building, fundraising, digital strategy, and voter outreach. It is filled with references to data, analytics, and technology.

Keep ReadingShow less
My Generation Can Spot the Deepfake. That’s Not Enough.
Smartphone with ai text in jeans pocket
Photo by Immo Wegmann on Unsplash

My Generation Can Spot the Deepfake. That’s Not Enough.

Thomas Massie, a seven-term Republican congressman from Kentucky, lost his primary on May 19. The race cost $32.6 million, making it the most expensive congressional primary in U.S. history. Among the weapons deployed against him: an AI-generated video showing him checking into a hotel room with Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar, with their hands clasped. The narrator called it "worse than adultery." A disclaimer at the bottom of the screen, in small text, read: "This satirical ad was created with artificial intelligence."

I watched the ad. It looks ridiculous. The movements are slightly too smooth, the lighting is off, and the scenario is so cartoonish that I genuinely could not tell at first whether it was meant to be taken seriously. But I'm 17, and I've spent the last four years watching AI-generated content get better in real time. I know what the seams look like. Massie, in his post-loss interview on Meet the Press, was blunt about who the ad actually reached: "It was actually very effective on the boomers."

Keep ReadingShow less
An illustration with the words, "AI," in the middle - Icons on a computer, robot, lock, and a car are around

AI is unpopular yet widely used. Explore how citizen-led “crackpot schemes” could shape AI policy, protect jobs, strengthen democracy, and maximize AI’s benefits while reducing its risks.

Andriy Onufriyenko / Getty Images

In Defense of “Crackpot Schemes” for AI Governance

AI is unpopular. And nearly a billion people use ChatGPT.

AI is destroying jobs. And fields predicted to have been eliminated by AI, like radiology, continue to grow and leverage the technology to improve their work.

Keep ReadingShow less
Digital illustration of robot's hand holding and supporting man who is working on his desk using computer, represent themes of artificial intelligence (AI), the future of work, and the intersection of humanity and technology.

A critique of Steven Rosenbaum's The Future of Truth and the irony of AI-generated errors in a book warning about AI, truth, trust, and democratic responsibility.

Andriy Onufriyenko / Getty Images

On Truth, Shame, and the Abuse of AI

A democracy is only as robust and vibrant as the citizens who sustain it. Self-government depends upon people willing to deliberate honestly, reason carefully, and exercise judgment responsibly. With the emergence of AI, this obligation becomes even more consequential because these powerful systems can either deepen human agency or quietly erode it. They can either help citizens think more clearly and participate more meaningfully, or they can encourage the outsourcing of judgment itself and the slow substitution of synthetic plausibility for human responsibility.

Imagine, then, publishing a book warning humanity about the epistemological collapse supposedly ushered in by artificial intelligence. Imagine assembling endorsements from solemn guardians of the humanities, critics of automation, custodians of truth, defenders of interpretation against probabilistic sludge. Imagine presenting yourself as a kind of intellectual fire marshal standing before a burning building, yelling that people must immediately stop playing with matches.

Keep ReadingShow less