We were never the sum of what we know.

One of modernity’s deepest illusions was the belief that human beings govern themselves through knowledge, as if political life rested, in the end, on informed judgment, durable memory, and the slow accumulation of understanding. But life never worked like that. Not at its beginnings, and not now. Living beings do not survive by containing the world in full representation. They survive by local orientation, selective response, threshold-sensitivity, and imperfect navigation through unstable environments. What we call knowledge came later: not as the ground of life, but as one of its temporary stabilizations.

That matters because the contemporary political crisis is still being described in the wrong language. We continue to speak as if the problem were simple: above, unstable rulers; below, deceived but intact citizens. But that picture no longer holds. What confronts us now is more severe.

Modern democracy still addresses people as citizens long after training them to survive as reactors.

That symmetry, however, must not mislead us. The two degradations are not born equally. The weakening below did not arise by accident, as if people had simply become shallow or distracted on their own. It was cultivated. A political, technological, and economic environment has been built around the erosion of duration: shorter attention, faster reaction, weaker continuity between event and consequence, and a public sphere increasingly organized around salience rather than judgment. Only within such an environment could forms of power flourish that no longer require coherence, proportion, or sustained competence in the older sense. The thinned citizen is not simply the twin of degraded rule. He is one of its conditions.

This is why the old language of manipulation no longer reaches the depth of the problem. Manipulation still assumes that someone deceives someone who might, under better conditions, detect the lie. But the contemporary situation is more radical. The issue is not merely that falsehood circulates. The issue is that the substrate in which judgment once had duration has itself been strategically weakened. The citizen no longer needs to remember for long. It is enough that he reacts in time. He no longer needs conviction. It is enough that he remains available to cues.

At this point the crisis stops being merely political. It becomes a crisis of admissibility.

The question is no longer simply who governs badly or why people choose badly. The harsher question is this: what kinds of beings are now being admitted to the management of irreversible consequences? War, law, infrastructure, borders, finance, ecological thresholds, collective memory: these are not........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)