The People's "Friend": In this masterpiece of revolutionary propaganda, the homicidal political psychopath, Jean-Paul Marat, has been transformed by Jacques-Louis David, the French Revolution's most accomplished artist, into a martyred hero of the ordinary people of Paris. Thanks to Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook, the ignorant and the angry no longer need a radical 'friend' with a printing press to amplify their voices. Today they can change the world with a fingertip.
BEN MORGAN IS RIGHT: “This is the first time in history that people with so little competence can so powerfully enter the civic discourse.”
The consequences of this undeniable fact, for ourselves as citizens, and for our
entire democratic political culture, are huge. When noise equals money, and
ignorance has been given such a mighty amplifier as the Internet, then
democracy, as a viable system of government, must come under enormous pressure.
The dangers of giving the angry and ignorant their own media
outlet was demonstrated most powerfully in the early 1790s, just as the French
Revolution was entering its “Reign of Terror”.
The radical political philosopher, physician and noted
scientist, Jean-Paul Marat, recognising the rising power of the poorest people
of Paris, founded a newspaper dedicated to both arousing and expressing their
most extreme political passions. In a sinister anticipation of the very worst
aspects of today’s social media, Marat’s Friend of The People turned
rumour into fact and gave voice to the poverty-stricken masses most
bloodthirsty impulses. To be denounced on the pages of Marat’s “fake news”-paper
very quickly became the equivalent of a death sentence. That Marat, himself,
was afflicted with an excruciating skin disease did nothing to calm his
homicidal fury towards any person or group he judged to be an enemy of the
people.
It was at Marat’s instigation that the revolutionary militia
– known as the National Guard – carried out the infamous “September Massacres”
of 1792. Over the course of a week National Guardsmen, their numbers augmented
by the Paris poor, broke into the capital’s prisons and butchered more than a
thousand prisoners. Marat had told his readers that the jails of Paris were
full of aristocrats ready to assist the counter-revolutionary forces massing on
France’s borders. To save the revolution, he declared, they must all be
pre-emptively executed. Some of the victims were, indeed, political prisoners
awaiting trial. Most, however, were common criminals. Even by the grisly
standards of eighteenth century Europe, the grotesque horror of the September
Massacres was profoundly shocking.
Marat’s next victims were the “Girondins”, a faction of the
National Assembly whom he suspected of excessive moderation. The Friend of
the People’s relentless campaigning convinced Marat’s readers that the
Girondins were plotting against the Revolution. In short order, his allies in
the National Assembly, the radical Jacobin faction, had the Girondins arrested,
tried before the Revolutionary Tribunal, declared guilty, and guillotined.
Marat’s bloody reign was brought to an abrupt end by a young
Girondin sympathiser called Charlotte Corday, who famously stabbed him to death
in his medicinal bath, after gaining access to the “people’s friend” by passing
herself off as an anti-Girondin informant. Secretly relieved to be rid of their
dangerous journalistic demagogue, the Jacobins transformed Marat into the Revolution’s
first great martyr. The painting entitled The Death of Marat, executed
by the era’s most accomplished artist, Jacques-Louis David, is an acknowledged
masterpiece of revolutionary propaganda.
This cautionary historical tale records only the
consequences of a single radical intellectual’s decision to align himself
wholeheartedly with the least educated and most desperate elements of a society
gripped by revolutionary change. The important difference between Marat’s Friend
of the People and Facebook is that, in order to work its malign political magic, the
former still required the participation of a guiding editorial hand, a
printers’ workshop, and a host of newspaper sellers. Contemporary social media
has done away with all these intermediaries. Today, the people need no friend,
they can speak for themselves.
These individual voices, algorithmically assembled into vast
aggregations of the like-minded, now possess the power to dictate the editorial
policies of the world’s newspapers and broadcasting networks. Dependent on the
electronic devices of these volatile and easily bored consumers for their
economic survival, the legacy media has all but given up on the notion that a
newspaper, magazine, radio station or television network should lead and inform
public opinion. This clear political goal, which Marat, himself, would have
endorsed – albeit in relation to the Parisians’ most extreme opinions – has
been supplemented by the media’s existential need to fashion itself into a
politically agnostic parasite. The new media organism’s only hope of
sustaining itself is to feast, with cynical efficiency, on the madness and
mania of the masses, and then excrete it back to them.
With the ignorance and prejudices of the masses setting the
social and political tone, the desperation and disdain of well-educated and
culturally sophisticated managers and professionals – the people who actually
keep a modern, technologically-driven society functioning – is easily imagined.
Gone are the days when these folk were able to filter out
the masses’ mania and madness from the news media; when the political parties
they largely controlled could aggregate a coherent policy agenda with which to
guide an otherwise inchoate electorate. Confronted with such monumental
stupidity in every sphere: politics, medicine, science; is it any wonder that
the technocrats in charge have learned how to transform the self-same social
media which has undermined the guided democracy of the past into the
undisclosed vector of its destruction in the present?
The covert manipulation of elections by means of social
media has now reached such a level of sophistication that those lacking the
skills to participate are rendered utterly irrelevant to the electoral process
– except as window-dressing. The impact of these techniques is already evident
in the deep organic political crisis currently gripping the United Kingdom.
Brexit, that great victory of the ignorant and the angry, has set the UK up for
a revolution of its own. A similar fate looks set to overwhelm the United
States in the aftermath of the 2020 presidential elections.
Will these revolts throw up their own versions of Jean-Paul
Marat? Of course. Only this time the people will not see him. And he will not
be their friend.
This essay was originally posted on The Daily Blog
of Tuesday, 2 July 2019.
