Modern Idiocracy: A Sociological Analysis of the Rise of Mediocrity and Superficiality

Introduction

In recent decades, the world has undergone a profound transformation in the way information is generated, consumed, and valued. In this context, concerns have arisen about a potential increase in "idiocracy," a term popularized by the 2006 film Idiocracy, which depicts a society dominated by ignorance and superficiality. The central question posed is: Is it true that human stupidity has increased in recent decades, or has the way it manifests simply changed?

The Rise of Superficiality in Popular Culture

One of the most noticeable aspects of modernity is the exponential growth of easily digestible content, such as viral videos, challenges, and reaction videos on social media. Sociologist Neil Postman, in his work Amusing Ourselves to Death (1985), warned about the danger of a society that prioritizes entertainment over critical thought. With the advent of the internet and short video platforms like TikTok, the culture of "shock value" and instant gratification has displaced more elaborate and intellectual content.

Philosopher Byung-Chul Han, in The Burnout Society (2010), argues that hyperconnectivity has led to an information overload where speed is prioritized over reflection. As a result, individuals prefer to consume easily accessible content that doesn't require intellectual effort, reinforcing the proliferation of the superficial and the trivial.

Social Media and the Mediocrity Algorithm

Social media platforms play a central role in promoting "idiocracy." A 2018 study published in Science by Vosoughi, Roy, and Aral found that fake news and sensationalist content spread faster and reach more people than verified information. This suggests that, rather than becoming more intelligent with mass access to information, humanity has developed a bias toward what is shocking and emotional, sacrificing rationality.

Platforms like YouTube and TikTok use algorithms that reward content that generates more interactions, leading to the rise of figures who build their success on scandal, mockery, and repetition of empty formulas. A 2021 study from Stanford University notes that "low-effort" content (such as exaggerated reactions or mockery) tends to attract more views than educational or informative videos.

The "Law of Least Effort" and the Dunning-Kruger Effect

The tendency toward mediocrity can also be understood from a psychological perspective. The Dunning-Kruger effect, described in 1999 by psychologists David Dunning and Justin Kruger, shows that people with less knowledge tend to overestimate their abilities, while experts tend to underestimate theirs. This phenomenon is visible in the culture of influencers and "gurus" who, without formal education or experience, present themselves as authorities on complex topics, ranging from economics to science.

On a societal level, the "law of least effort" seems to dominate the behavior of many individuals. In The Revolt of the Masses (1929), José Ortega y Gasset describes how societies can fall into generalized conformity, where critical thinking is replaced by the opinion of the masses. This is reflected in the way popular figures gain influence without offering truly valuable content.

Have We Returned to a New Intellectual Dark Age?

Despite the apparent "democratization" of access to information, many argue that we are experiencing a new "Dark Age" in intellectual terms, where pseudoscience and misinformation thrive. Researcher Susan Jacoby, in The Age of American Unreason (2008), argues that anti-intellectual culture has grown exponentially, displacing critical thinking and replacing it with tribal thinking and conspiracy theories.

On the other hand, studies from the University of Edinburgh have found that, although the average IQ has increased over the past 100 years (the "Flynn effect"), abstract and analytical thinking has declined in newer generations. This may be due to reliance on technologies that eliminate the need to memorize or process information deeply.

Conclusion: Is There Hope?

While it is easy to fall into pessimism regarding the apparent modern "idiocracy," it is also true that access to knowledge has never been so widespread. What has changed is not people's intellectual capacity, but the incentives of culture and success models. There are still spaces where critical thinking and creativity can thrive, but they require more effort and commitment.

The challenge lies in fostering independent thought and the appreciation of depth in a world dominated by immediacy. The solution does not lie in rejecting technology or modernity, but in finding ways to use them to promote a richer and more meaningful culture.

Ultimately, idiocracy is not an inevitable sentence, but the result of a series of collective decisions. It will depend on how society responds to these challenges whether it becomes an irreversible phenomenon or simply an episode in the long journey of human evolution.