https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dAIJRjb-Bw
=title=
AI and the Enshittification Era w/ Cory Doctorow | The Weekly Show with Jon Stewart
=channel=
The weekly show with John Stewart (826K subscribers)
In the conversation, *Cory Doctorow* expresses a rejection of individualistic "digital self-reliance"—often framed as "voting with your wallet"—in favor of **collective action and political organization**. His reasoning includes the following key points:
* **Shopping isn't politics:** *Doctorow* argues that agonizing over individual consumer choices (like which app to use or which product to buy) is ineffective because the corporations have significantly more power and capital than the average consumer. He emphasizes that change requires **movements**, not just personal boycotts (1:17:16 - 1:17:41).
* **The risk of isolation and blame:** He explains that when people try to change the world through individual consumption and fail, it often leads to frustration. Instead of targeting the companies, people end up angry at their friends or community members who make different consumer choices, which destroys the **solidarity** needed for real systemic change (1:17:42 - 1:17:56).
* **The power of local and civil society:** He encourages people to reject the helplessness of being a lone consumer and instead **join local groups, organize unions, and engage with civil society organizations** (like the *EFF*). He points out that even "unregarded" local offices or community groups can make material differences in daily life, such as preventing data center installations or influencing surveillance policies (1:17:56 - 1:18:22).
"There's a learned helplessness that goes along with systems that seem too complex and too large [for people] to have any impact [on those systems]. It's not a true story."
In other words, if you accept this narrative (a story told to you by yourself or to you by others), it keeps you from using your potential **collective power** to --for example-- resist the disproportional power of monopolies, or regulate surveillance[^1].
...
Gemini@YouTube provides the following:
"[Jon] posits that this feeling of powerlessness stems precisely from the perception that digital systems (meaning Ai and how it is being used instituionally) are **too complex, too large, and too dominant** for individuals to challenge or influence. By framing these issues as inevitable "weather" or vast, unstoppable historical forces, it[^1] discourages people from organizing and taking direct action, such as enforcing anti-monopoly laws or regulating corporate surveillance (1:49:38 - 1:49:52, 1:16:00 - 1:16:43).
*Doctorow* rejects this helplessness by emphasizing that:
* **Systemic Agency:** These technological and economic outcomes are the results of specific decisions made by individuals and corporations, not inevitable laws of nature (1:49:38 - 1:49:50).
* **Historical Precedent:** Past generations successfully challenged rapacious monopolies and powerful interests; they were not "smarter or better" than us, proving that current systems can also be reformed through collective effort (1:47:19 - 1:47:46, 1:18:52 - 1:19:01).
* **The Goal of Inaction:** The narrative that systems are too complex serves to protect the status quo, effectively convincing people that they are just "NPCs" in a game they cannot control, rather than citizens with the agency to demand change (1:50:57 - 1:51:38).
"
footnote [^1]: Gemini@YouTube reitterated this well, saying:
"Yes, your assessment of *Cory Doctorow*'s argument is accurate. *Doctorow* argues that the "learned helplessness" of the digital age is a **constructed narrative**—a story used to keep people from exercising their **collective power** (1:16:24 - 1:16:33)."
[^3] I replaced "the system" with "it", because it is the 'framing' which causes the result. What "the system" is and whether it is framing a narrative is unclear. Is it "the system" which tells this stroy? This "system" is probably deliberately vaguely defined, and/or is a placeholder term. But we can tell ourselves this story.
.JPG)
