Starving the trolls as a thought experiment.
In our modern circus of political warfare, the central battleground isn’t reality—it’s speculation. The vast majority of what’s called “debate” today isn’t really debate at all; it’s people fighting ghosts. We’re stuck in endless arguments, not against actual positions or clearly-stated policies, but against shadowy assumptions about what our opponents might think or secretly intend to do.
We’ve created a massive feedback loop where misinformation and emotionally charged propaganda reign supreme, driven by algorithms and bots whose sole purpose is to inflame emotions, distort intentions, and fuel outrage. People don’t just disagree anymore—they wage war against imaginary opponents created by intentional misinformation.
Think about it: How often have you heard something that “the other side” supposedly believes, and thought, “Who actually thinks that?” We’re not arguing with our neighbors; we’re shouting at caricatures painted by media personalities and political operatives who’ve perfected the dark art of emotional manipulation.
What if we just refused to participate in this psychological warfare altogether?
Imagine if tomorrow everyone decided to stop speculating about what other people might think or plan to do. Instead of engaging with speculation and rumors, what if we strictly focused on clearly defined, observable problems and discussed pragmatic, actionable solutions?
No more guessing games, no more playing into fear-based narratives—just reality, clear and simple.
Under this new paradigm, politicians, journalists, and everyday citizens alike would discuss real problems, not abstract blame. Instead of arguments driven by what “they might be planning,” we’d ask, “What can we actually do about poverty, healthcare, education, or infrastructure today?”
If we committed to such radical transparency, the very foundation of propaganda crumbles. Emotional speculation would lose its power. The bots, trolls, and manipulators would starve without the outrage they depend upon. Politics could slowly, perhaps painfully, shift from a spectacle of personality cults and manufactured villains toward genuine problem-solving.
Of course, there would be resistance. Those currently benefiting from divisive narratives—politicians who capitalize on anger, media outlets thriving on clicks, or interest groups profiting from chaos—won’t quietly accept this shift. But the change doesn’t require their permission. It only requires enough people to collectively say: “Enough.”
Here’s how we do it:
- Stop Engaging in Speculative Arguments: When a discussion veers into speculation about motives or secret intentions, we simply refuse to participate. Focus the conversation exclusively on the observable and factual.
- Clearly Define Problems: Identify real-world, verifiable issues in explicit terms—poverty rates, failing infrastructure, healthcare accessibility—without inserting speculative blame or hidden agendas.
- Discuss Solutions, Not Villains: Talk about actionable, evidence-based steps to address these defined problems. Make pragmatic solutions the centerpiece of every political and social discussion.
This approach would likely yield significant, tangible benefits:
- Reduced Polarization: Removing speculation and emotional manipulation from discourse naturally diminishes anger and division.
- Greater Civic Engagement: When discussions revolve around real-world problems, more citizens might participate constructively, rather than disengage from overwhelming negativity.
- Improved Policymaking: Evidence-based dialogue naturally leads to better-informed policies, focusing on actual solutions rather than ideologically charged battles.
This experiment doesn’t require radical institutional change overnight. It starts with a personal decision to simply refuse to speculate, to reject propaganda, and to demand clarity.
Yes, it’s idealistic. But the alternative is our current reality—arguing endlessly with ghosts, trapped in a cycle of outrage and misinformation, while real problems go unsolved and real people suffer.
Maybe it’s time we try something radically sane.
