It is easy for people to get used to a worsening life situation when the changes come slowly.

Bad things are bad even if they are presented as leading to a better “new normal.”

People in free societies are not powerless to resist incremental bad changes.

People may not react strongly to bad news if it comes to them slowly and incrementally. This can result in the person essentially resetting what seems normal to them. That is like the parable about the frog in a pot of water that is slowly heated so that the frog lets itself be boiled to death.[i]

In today’s society, there seem to be many cases where people have personal connections to societal changes, such as new policies, guidelines, or actions concerning immigration, vaccines, or global affairs. Whether or not people agree with them, because of their frequency and number, some people may find themselves becoming numb to all the changes and experiencing “learned helplessness.”[ii] It is also worth noting that those changes have become so numerous and frequent that the media seems to have stopped using the word “unprecedented” to describe them.

Why Bad News Becomes a “New Normal”

People become numb to the changes when the congestion of news stories and information changes does not create cognitive dissonance, since each individual nugget of information isn’t too far off from what preceded it.

The new normal is also often presented with the assuredness of being accurate, better, and – of course – completely normal. And of course, such news spreads much faster on social media, so people are exposed to those narratives more often and faster, which can rapidly make them seem normative.

While some pundits and advocates in specific areas (like health care or the economy) will try to call attention to the harms of bad new policies or actions, their voices are often dismissed by those trying to establish a new normal.

How to Resist Being Pushed Into a Bad New Normal

Although the mantra from the Borg from Star Trek (Next Generation) was “Resistance is futile,” that is not the case for resisting the gradual slide into accepting bad things as being OK.

Resisting that downward slide starts by asking pointed questions:

How did we get here, where are we going, and why?

How does this all compare to where we were before, and are there historical precedents or touchstones gauging how normal this situation is?

Who is pushing the narratives moving society towards a new normal that is bad for me, and how are they benefiting? Is it making them money? Is it designed to expand or maintain their positions of power or wealth?

The first step in positively responding to those questions is to improve your ability to question the validity of the information sources. Media literacy is an umbrella term for the skills for determining the validity of those sources. Improving people’s media literacy is an ongoing challenge in the “misinformation age” because of the proliferation of social media and the development of new and better A.I. systems that can produce fake “news,” audio, and video.

Being able to understand information sources, the agendas behind whoever is spreading the information, and the validity of the "facts" they are presenting empowers people to challenge them. As Hamlet said, "take arms against a sea of troubles. And by opposing end them."

The next step is to challenge the bad stories, images, narratives, or policies in ways that help others understand that the changes are not OK. And not just bad for others, but not OK for you, your family, and your community. Then you need to communicate your concerns to people you know in person, virtually on social media, in letters to the editors of newspapers, by calling into radio shows, by speaking at town hall meetings, and by writing to or visiting elected officials.

The key is to communicate that things are not OK, that the changes are not OK, and that you are objecting because it is bad for you, your family, and your community. And in those communications, it helps to be as specific as possible. For example, if A.I. data centers are driving up electricity rates, that can certainly be objected to.[iii] Or if heightened (and potentially unwarranted) law enforcement activities are hurting the local economy, that too can be objected to.

Summary & Conclusions

Bad things are bad even if they are presented as leading to a better “new normal.” It is easier for people to get used to a worsening life situation when the changes come slowly. And being desensitized to the changes because they occur slowly does not mean they are benign or harmless.

Resistance to accepting bad things—and sliding into a new normal—starts by recognizing that small bad changes add up and cause serious harm. The next step is to call attention to the small bad steps and resist acceptance. This can be done. People need to do it for themselves and their communities since those presenting and spreading the seeds of a bad new normal have self-interest reasons for promoting the changes. People in free societies are not helpless, and resistance is not futile.

i. This is not true. The frog will jump out of the water when it gets too warm. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog

ii. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/learned-helplessness

iii. https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5784406-data-centers-midterm-debate/

There was a problem adding your email address. Please try again.

By submitting your information you agree to the Psychology Today Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy

© Psychology Today