Thats a killer line about the printing press being to the Reformation what the internet is to modern protest. The parallel between Luthers pamphlets going viral and todays decentralized info warfare is spot-on. I'd never considered how both technologies didnt just spread ideas but fundamentaly changed the structure of authority itself. Power hates when the middleman gets cut out.
Absolutely — that’s exactly what fascinates me too. Technologies like the printing press and the internet rewrite the rules about who gets to authorize information. Luther didn’t just challenge the Church’s theology; he challenged its monopoly on distribution. Today’s digital networks do the same to governments, media gatekeepers, and any institution built on controlling the flow of information.
Once the bottleneck disappears, authority has to compete in an open marketplace rather than dictate from above. And as you said, power structures really don’t enjoy that shift.
For example, yesterday I wrote a piece describing what happened in Venezuela as a kidnapping, while Western media insists on calling it capture or detention — though if Russia had done it, they’d likely call it kidnapping. Sure, it didn’t create waves, but at least the idea reached a few hundred people — whether they agreed or not is another story. The thing is, in the past — as recently as less than three decades ago — that never would have been possible.
I agree. However, if we're not careful, knowledge can become its own kind of religion. Online, you often see crowds talking about science as if it offers certainties, when in reality, only faith can do that. Science fundamentally is against certainties, as they'd imply dogmas.
Thats a killer line about the printing press being to the Reformation what the internet is to modern protest. The parallel between Luthers pamphlets going viral and todays decentralized info warfare is spot-on. I'd never considered how both technologies didnt just spread ideas but fundamentaly changed the structure of authority itself. Power hates when the middleman gets cut out.
Absolutely — that’s exactly what fascinates me too. Technologies like the printing press and the internet rewrite the rules about who gets to authorize information. Luther didn’t just challenge the Church’s theology; he challenged its monopoly on distribution. Today’s digital networks do the same to governments, media gatekeepers, and any institution built on controlling the flow of information.
Once the bottleneck disappears, authority has to compete in an open marketplace rather than dictate from above. And as you said, power structures really don’t enjoy that shift.
For example, yesterday I wrote a piece describing what happened in Venezuela as a kidnapping, while Western media insists on calling it capture or detention — though if Russia had done it, they’d likely call it kidnapping. Sure, it didn’t create waves, but at least the idea reached a few hundred people — whether they agreed or not is another story. The thing is, in the past — as recently as less than three decades ago — that never would have been possible.
Knowledge is deadly to religion. Justly so.
I agree. However, if we're not careful, knowledge can become its own kind of religion. Online, you often see crowds talking about science as if it offers certainties, when in reality, only faith can do that. Science fundamentally is against certainties, as they'd imply dogmas.
I'm not sure I would call it a religion but it can certainly make for some arrogant people.