In the words of the renowned German writer Goethe, “When eras are on the decline, all tendencies are subjective; but, on the other hand, when matters are ripening for a new epoch, all tendencies are objective. Each worthy effort turns its force from the inward to the outward world.” This thought resonates strongly today, suggesting we are witnessing a significant shift in our current epoch. The preceding era embraced absolute individual subjectivity, where personal truths overshadowed collective understanding, crafting a peculiar power structure.
In this context, the emphasis on individual subjectivity has contributed to a breakdown of social cohesion, which relies on a collective narrative that bestows meaning upon events. Philosopher Byung-Chul Han notes that facts and information are increasingly met with skepticism, as people question the validity of alternative perspectives. Disconnected bits of information often fail to form a coherent narrative and can render the world less clear rather than illuminate it.
Han observes, “Truth, unlike information, has a centripetal force that holds society together.” He argues that narratives are essential in establishing truth. “Pieces of information do not coalesce into knowledge or truth, which are forms of narration.” Therefore, while detached information fuels individual subjectivity, coherent narratives foster a shared objectivity. Han suggests that democracy is evolving into an era marked by an overabundance of information, or infocracy.
From the late 20th century until the dawn of the 21st, the internationalization of Western liberal values was dominated by a singular hegemonic narrative. Though other perspectives existed, none matched its authority, being evaluated primarily in comparison to it. This dominant narrative transformed information into accepted truths.
For instance, any government resisting liberal hegemony could be labeled as a pariah or terrorist, regardless of the context of its actions—be they moral, economic, or political. A shift in a country’s power structure could be termed a “freedom revolution” or a “tyrannical dictatorship,” depending on alignment with this overarching narrative. Thus, a shared reality emerged, characterized by a common objective truth.
This shared narrative posited notions such as democracy represents the fairest political system, capitalism is the most effective economic model, sciences serve as the ultimate arbiter of truth, morality is an individual choice, and human rights exist as universal truths. At the helm was the State, safeguarding these principles—considered non-negotiable truths.
However, the certainty of these truths is now fading. The hegemonic state tasked with enforcing them—an assertion that every right requires a sovereign—seems to be losing its influence and undergoing its own narrative transformation. Competing sociopolitical narratives, once viewed as fringe, no longer feel compelled to adjust linguistically to fit an international consensus.
The contemporary discourse centers around multipolarity, where distinct civilizational states present varying values. It could be argued that nations are beginning to assert their subjectivity, crafting their own narratives and truths. This shift aligns with Goethe’s concepts of an epochal transformation.
Numerous instances highlight this transition. Ukraine, Palestine, Venezuela, and Taiwan exemplify nations grappling with competing narratives that seek to define their identities and truths. Conflicts, social values, and political structures are increasingly influenced by these diverging perspectives.
It’s important to note that this discussion is not framed as a value judgment on either position; it merely highlights a dynamic shift. The U.S. power structure is evolving, influenced by national conservative movements that are reshaping social values and the fabric of society. The Western world is inevitably following suit.
This shift is particularly pronounced in the collective West, which, having been the leading order, is significantly impacted by this disorder. Yet, other nations are also distancing themselves from Western ideals and institutions in favor of more indigenous approaches. Clear examples of this include China, Russia, India, and Türkiye.
Both mainstream and alternative media has become a battleground for these competing narratives. What were once considered conspiracy theories are increasingly finding their way into mainstream discourse. For example, Tucker Carlson’s videos questioning the narrative surrounding 9/11 exemplify how far this shift has progressed. Additionally, the consolidation of media ownership—such as David Ellison’s monopoly and Trump’s critiques of outlets like the BBC as “fake news”—underscores the changing landscape.
Alternative media voices present varied interpretations of the same events. Was the prolonged conflict against Bashar al-Assad a regime-change endeavor or a war for liberation? Are the Gulf monarchies legitimate entities or oppressive regimes? Is Taiwan an inseparable part of China, or does it have the right to independence?
As suggested by renowned Japanese director Kurosawa in his film Rashomon, truth is often circumstantial and elusive. The movie presents four eyewitnesses recounting contradictory versions of the same event: the murder of a samurai and the assault of his wife. Each character’s narrative reflects their individual motivations to justify their actions and present themselves favorably.
Amid this apparent narrative transformation, one aspect remains largely unquestioned: the monetary system. The structure of economic distribution may be subject to change, but the foundational elements of our financial organization—fiat currencies and the banking system—seem to be the only enduring constants across different narratives.
As we navigate this complex narrative collapse, one thing is clear: a new world will inevitably emerge. The pressing question remains: as Tancredi once observed, is everything changing to ensure that, in essence, nothing truly changes?
