Power: Delusion and the Return of Authority

"Power comes from retained surplus value. The workers need to fight and focus on pay . . . " Dmytri Kleiner (widely read commentator, June 16, 2025)

The modern focus on “power” (and the “oppression” that results from the corresponding lack) is fundamentally misplaced. Whether expressed in Mr. Kleiner’s “class-war” terms or in today’s common political/economic fashions, a grave misunderstanding about Digital society is being expressed. When the qualifiers “authoritarian,” “totalitarian,” “autocratic,” “oligarchic,” “monarchic,” &c, are attached, further errors are being committed. We are simply venting our frustration and ignorance. We are deluded.

Television supplied the narrative. Good vs. Evil. White hats vs. Black hats. Right vs. Left. Rich vs. Poor. Men vs. Women. White vs. Color. Locals vs. Foreigners. Humans vs. the Robots. Mountains vs. the Sea. It’s the story TV loves to tell (and sell). Over and over. But it’s not the way the world works. It’s too simple. It’s too superficial. It’s too stupid. It’s too Figure. Life is far more complicated. By design. We now need to locate the basic Ground underneath our feet. Fearlessly.

We don’t live in a Television world anymore. So, the TV narrative doesn’t work very well nowadays. In terms of the McLuhan Tetrad, we have entered the “Flip” quadrant (originally termed “Reversal”) for the TV environment. In their Laws of Media: The New Science (1988), the flip of TV is called the “inner trip” (p. 158). “Social media” – the final form of Television – has turned us into “broadcasters.” Depressed. Panicked. Friendless. Suicidal. Hooked on our own opinions. Unable to negotiate with reality. Dumb as a doornail.

We live in a Digital world now. Or, more accurately, in between two worlds. We are becoming aware of where we are going and where we have been. “Power” is fading into the distance. To be replaced by “Authority.” New narratives are being formed. New dangers are being confronted. Memory is coming back, and fantasy is not so much fun anymore. Humanity is becoming human again – if we don’t blow it this time.

Power

Television likes elections. Much of the billions spent on campaigns go into TV advertising. Along with sports, elections keep Television in business. We call this “democracy” but, in fact, it is psychological warfare. Buying votes. Alternately, when a new Pope is elected, the ballots are secret (actually, they are hand-written, counted then burned) and no “self-promotion” is permitted. No media influence. No movie stars giving testimonials. The Chapel doors are locked. The eligible “demos” (voters) is restricted. Authority is asserted. Two very different approaches to governance.

Once again, Aristotle is being consulted. His Politics (c. 350BC) is being debated, in large part because of the work of the Thiel/Vance-connected pundit/philosopher Curtis Varvin. However, Yarvin changes a few things – deliberately reducing Aristotle’s six categories to only three, side-stepping Tyranny in the process. That was clever, even Machiavellian, but unlikely to survive scrutiny. His Monarchy is an “ideal,” not likely to be achieved, whereas his Oligarchy and Democracy are all too real. And the Polis/Republic is nowhere to be seen.

But what Yarvin really misses are the effects of Digital technology. He imagines a further concentration of “power,” – a political/economic “CEO” -- when, in fact, things are heading in the opposite direction. Television required the centralization of a “mass audience” (aka “scale”). On the other hand, Digital de-centralizes. Once again, the Catholic Church has a better idea: Subsidiarity, a cornerstone of Catholic Social Teaching, as mentioned early by Leo XIV. Subsidiarity asks for “power” – both decisions and responsibilities – to be pushed to the lowest possible levels. Furthermore, the Church says it intends to practice this on itself through the process of “Synodality” (calling on the laity to participate in governance, however difficult that may be to execute).

Yarvin calls himself a “sceptic.” That was an appropriate attitude for the Television past. Under TV/social media conditions, institutional trust has collapsed. Just as it should have, in a dying Paradigm. Everyone is a sceptic. As in the 60s slogan, “Don’t trust anyone over 30 . . .” However, under Digital conditions, a more appropriate approach could be “apocalypsist” – focusing on “revealing” and “uncovering,” not backing up and unloading the dump truck. We know Curtis and have enjoyed his company, but many have concluded that there’s just too much “hey, look at me” on that performance stage.

That’s not how Authority is gained. Authority listens. Authority expects honesty. Authority requires respect. Authority must be granted, not seized. Power doesn’t need any of that. How did we lose our grip on Authority? How did we get things so backwards?

Authority

In 1950, Theodor Adorno &al published their influential book, The Authoritarian Personality. Wikipedia tells us “The authoritarian personality is personality type characterized by a disposition to authority figures with unquestioning obedience and respect.” The Wiki goes on to mention that despite disagreement about whether this is best described as a “personality, attitude, ideology, or disposition,” scholars can still find it useful. Yes, even though the Freudian/Frommian psychoanalytic methods deployed in the book have long been abandoned, the overall theme remains formidable. Making “authority” something to avoid. Bad Authority.

Every time someone deploys the accusation of “fascist,” you can thank Adorno &co. The fact that Mussolini was clear that “fascism” is a form of “corporativism” – or the takeover of the state by commercial interests (which, as Bertram Gross told us can present itself as being very “Friendly,” Disney-style, with Tony Stark as the “hero”) – the negative rhetoric remains in place. “Fascism” has become a meme-phrase, without any need for historic coherence or even a clear definition. Adorno devised what was called the “F-scale,” scoring people on their “fascist” tendencies. It has been replaced with the RWA (Right-Wing Authoritarianism) scale – in which the U.S.A. scored 25.6% for “high” and 13.4% for “low” (compared to Canada’s nearly reversed 13.4% and 21.3%) in a 2021 survey. Same idea just rebranded.

Adorno (1903-69) was a German philosopher, musicologist and social theorist. He was a leading member of the Frankfurt School (aka Institute for Social Research), along with Max Horkheimer, Eric Fromm, Walter Benjamin, Herbert Marcuse, &al. Critical of Soviet-style “Marxism-Leninism” (indeed Communist Party members were banned from membership), nonetheless the ISR was clearly a “left-wing” operation with serious intellectual linkage to Marx &al. Thus, the political stigma implied by “fascism.” Adorno contributed to a variety of projects, with the ISR leaving Nazi Germany and settling at Columbia University (before moving back in 1953), including an early involvement in the Princeton/Columbia Rockefeller Radio Research Project (1937-43).

Overall, The Authoritarian Personality was considered an early landmark in the discipline of Social Psychology (although not so much anymore). Initially grouped at MIT under the leadership of Kurt Lewin (1890-1947), it was a major research effort studying psychological warfare, persuasion, and propaganda, later moving to the Univ. of Michigan upon his death. Social Psychology has been considered by many to be a locus of efforts to “control” society through psychological means. An early history of the field can be found in Christopher Simpson’s 2015 Science of Coercion: Communications Research & Psychological Warfare, 1945-1960, detailing the role of the CIA &al in this effort.

Power was integral to the Television Paradigm. Authority is crucial for the Digital Paradigm. But how will we bring Authority back from the hellish pit into which Adorno discarded it?

Spirituality

Few institutions today can legitimately claim Authority. The Vatican is one of them – as the outpouring of support for the newly elected Pope Leo XIV amply illustrates. What many said is that “he gives me hope.” Hope is a Christian theological virtue, along with Faith and Charity. We once named our baby girls Faith, Hope and Charity. Under Digital conditions, we will be doing that once again. It’s in the air. Hope is coming back. And the Church is involved.

Scandal is the enemy of Hope. Sexual abuse. Financial Hijinks. Cover-ups and secret “pink” cabals. The Vatican has had more than its own share of scandal. What had been dubbed a “Catholic Renaissance” in the 1930s (leading to the conversion of Marshall McLuhan and to his key contributions to the journal Renascence) – particularly under the hand of Pope Pius XI (papacy 1922-39) and his “Catholic International” aimed at the Soviet Comintern – had already exhausted itself after WWII. Paul Blanshard (1892-1980) – “socialist,” “secular humanist,” and editor at The Nation magazine – published his American Freedom and Catholic Power in 1949. Still in effect, in 1960 candidate JFK felt compelled to declare that Rome could not influence him as President. No more scandal was the goal. It didn’t work. JFK was assassinated. Scandalously.

Today, we are living in a new Paradigm. The Church’s recent scandalous history was in the past Paradigm. Digital now. Electric past. Change is happening all around us.

In 1918, the German sociologist/historian Max Weber (1864-1920) gave a lecture in Munich titled “Science as a Vocation” (translated by C. Wright Mills in 1946). He concluded by saying --

“The fate of our times is characterized by rationalization and intellectualization and, above all, by ‘disenchantment of the world.’ [Quotes original] Precisely the ultimate and most sublime values have retreated from public life either into the transcendental realm of mystic life or into the brotherliness of direct and personal human relations . . . If one tries intellectually to construe new religions without a new and genuine prophecy, in an inner sense, something similar [to what has happened in “monstrous” art] will result, but with still worse results. And, academic prophecy, finally, will create only fanatical sects but never a genuine community . . .”

That was the Electric Paradigm. Monstrous. Today we are experiencing re-enchantment. Worldwide. Spiritual civilizations are on the rise. Where’s Max Weber when we need him?

Pope Leo XIV says he will tackle the pressing issues that arise with A.I. using Catholic Social Teaching (CST). Authoritatively. The first CST principle of Human Dignity is incompatible with A.I. The “robots” are meant to be our “slaves,” not the other way around. To date, the Church has resisted taking on modern Psychology – which patterns humans on computers, also removing their inherent dignity. It’s supposed to be the study of the Psyche (aka “Soul”). Digital ends the monstrous Modernity. Faculty Psychology and Digital Catholic Social Teaching (DCST) has – hopefully – finally arrived again.

Humans are uniquely capable of believing and participating in the transcendence of material conditions. Robots can’t do that. In Philip K. Dick’s (1928-82) 1968 science fiction novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? the plot revolved around a “synthetic” religion and human beliefs. Dick’s non-fiction essays make it clear that he was really concerned about the humans and their “religions,” not the robots. Hollywood completely left this out in their Bladerunner series, making the films just another “secular” version of the us vs. them narrative. But it wasn’t.

Technology must serve transcendence. Not the other way around.

Technology

Marshall McLuhan subtitled his 1964 Understanding Media with The Extensions of Man. He further suggested that Electricity was an “extension” of our “nervous system.” Unfortunately, as his own personal library – now housed at the Rare Book Collection at the University of Toronto – illustrates, McLuhan knew little about the human “nervous system.” It’s a lot more complicated than that.

Technology does change us. McLuhan got that right. His mentor, Harold Innis (1894-1952) also got that right. Yes, a spear is an extension of our arms. And, yes equipped with a spear for hunting game, primitive humans did tend to lose their original “arm-capacity,” leading to a kind of “amputation.” So far so good. But the human (indeed, mammalian &c) “nervous system” isn’t simply electric. It’s also chemical. Neurons are electric. Synapses are chemical. Or, as neuroscientist Angus Fletcher puts it, “sparks” (connections) and “soup” (plugs). Plus, there are multiple “nervous systems.” McLuhan’s metaphor wasn’t very useful. He did that sometimes. We can do better.

McLuhan’s worst “blind spot” was Psychology. As we have recently noted, humans are “Of Two Minds.” Yes, this fact is a serious problem for A.I. – where today’s research has only attempted to “simulate” one of them. Alas, McLuhan wasn’t equipped to handle this. He was a “literary critic” and looked to the Catholic Church and his own mentors to help him out with much of the rest. They failed him. His mentor Bernard Muller-Thym knew the answer, as did his student Walter Ong, S.J., but they apparently never told Marshall (or his son Eric). We have attempted to correct this oversight with our treatment of Faculty Psychology – writing/assembling a 200+ page book, Ecology of the Inner Senses (Dianoetikon, 2020) – so that A.I. can properly be dealt with, while still using McLuhan’s insights.

A colleague of the Center, Thomas Harmon, PhD (professor, University of St. Thomas in Houston, Texas) has recently published a thoughtful (and debut) essay in the journal First Things, titled “Demons and ChatGPT.” He concludes by saying --

“The Christian must practice spiritual watchfulness and custody of the eyes. In our time, this means treating A.I. not as a source of authority or personal significance, but as a tool with no inherent claim on our attention or trust. Anthanasius [a 4^th-century bishop/theologian] writes: ‘Where Christ is named, and his faith, there all idolatry is deposed and all imposture of evil spirits is exposed, and any spirit is unable to endure even the name, nay even barely hearing flies and disappears.” So too here. Clarity begins when we name the thing rightly. A.I. does not possess insight. It cannot judge. The only real threat is our willingness to cooperate with the delusion that work of our hands is our friend, or even our superior.”

No insight. No judgement. No Authority. Just delusion. If all you have is a computer, then everything looks like an algorithm. Pure delusion.

Power is an Electric delusion. Authority is a Digital beneficence. It is a principle that emphasizes the moral obligation to act for the benefit of others, promoting their well-being and preventing harm – actively doing good, while minimizing potential risks. We are moving from Power to Authority. May God help us.