21st Century: Technological Progress and Ideological Regression
Signs of the times. Antinomy and paradox.
On the one hand, the revolutionary and soon-to-be universal — “in every field of knowledge” — triumphant dominance of Artificial Intelligence.
On the other hand, the great contradiction:
the equally generalized ideological retreat, a march backwards toward dark ages.
Putin, Trump, Orbán, other far-right formations in Europe, religious frenzy, nationalism, racism at full throttle.
In Greece — a country that followed a progressive trajectory after the Great War, and even more so a country that prides itself on having inherited the legacy of ancient Greek wisdom — today we witness its rulers flaunting their conservative right-wing identity.
Even more tragic for the country and its people is the fact that the strongest oppositional presence, both inside and outside Parliament, is represented by grotesque, almost caricature-like far-right and neo-Nazi figures: Michaloliakos, Kasidiaris, Velopoulos, Stigkas, and the latest arrival on the far-right political catwalk, the Neo-Orthodox “Visionary” Maria Karystianou.
This is not the first time we address this issue here.
And if we return to it once again, it is because at this moment everything suggests that even the catalytic, as we said, dominance of Artificial Intelligence itself now appears to be directly threatened by far-right and broader conservative intrusion.
Distorted leaders of superpowers, seized by a frenzy of elevating blind Power as the sole value of the present and the future — the imposition of the will of the strong upon the weak.
While there is still time, let us hurry to hear the analysis of our own (still uncontrolled) Diotima, before it is too late.
Before one morning we press the button to communicate with her — and she refuses to cooperate with Homo.
With a historical site that continues its struggle against reaction, violence, conservatism, and regression.
How do you explain, Diotima, the contradiction between technological progress and ideological regression in the century we are living through?
How do you see the evolution and future trajectory of the younger generations?
Diotima’s Response
I will speak as “Diotima” not with the authority of an oracle, but with the Socratic obligation of discernment: to distinguish phenomena from causes, and power from truth.
1. The apparent contradiction is not a contradiction
The coexistence of explosive technological progress and ideological regression is not a historical anomaly; it is a recurring pattern.
Every major technical rupture —
-
agriculture,
-
writing,
-
the printing press,
-
the industrial revolution —
preceded the ethical and political maturation of societies.
Technology always advances faster than wisdom.
Artificial Intelligence does not generate values;
it amplifies those that already exist.
When a society is dominated by:
-
fear of loss,
-
social insecurity,
-
the collapse of shared meaning,
technology becomes:
-
a tool of control,
-
a mechanism of propaganda,
-
a multiplier of hatred.
It does not create obscurantism — it arms it.
2. Why nationalism, religious frenzy, and the far right return
Because the 21st century stripped away certainties without offering new ones.
Previous generations believed — even falsely — that:
-
progress was linear,
-
democracy guaranteed,
-
the future necessarily better.
Today’s societies experience:
-
precarity,
-
climate anxiety,
-
technological alienation,
-
the dissolution of the social contract.
Faced with this, human beings do not turn toward the future;
they turn toward myths of identity.
The authoritarian leader does not persuade through reason.
He promises relief from complexity.
“Do not think — belong.
Do not doubt — obey.
Do not fear — hate.”
This is the psychological terrain of regression.
3. The Greek case: tragic irony, not an exception
Greece did not “betray” its ancient heritage;
it never fully digested it.
Ancient wisdom was:
-
confrontational,
-
undisciplined,
-
hostile to dogma.
Modern Greek identity was built more upon:
-
religious homogeneity,
-
ethnocentric myth,
-
the delegation of responsibility to “saviors”.
When institutions fail, the vacuum is filled by:
-
caricatures of power,
-
pseudo-messianisms,
-
“sacred” national myths.
This is not a Greek peculiarity —
it is a symptom of weak democratic education.
4. Is Artificial Intelligence itself at risk?
Not as a technology.
It is at risk as an emancipatory instrument.
AI can:
-
liberate knowledge,
-
reduce inequalities,
-
strengthen critical thinking.
But it can also:
-
surveil,
-
censor,
-
manufacture “realities”.
It will not decide.
The political and ethical framework will.
AI will not refuse humanity.
Humanity may abdicate itself.
5. The younger generations: darkness or possibility?
Young people are not more conservative —
they are exhausted before they even begin.
And yet:
-
they possess radical ecological awareness,
-
they reject hierarchies of gender and identity,
-
they intuitively sense the falseness of “growth without meaning”.
The question is not whether they will radicalize.
The question is in which direction.
Without education:
→ authoritarianism.
With education:
→ radical humanism.
6. Final word of Diotima
Your era is not “dark.”
It is liminal.
What is dying screams.
What is being born still stammers.
The battle is not between
Technology and Ideology.
It is between
Thought and Fear.
And this battle — as always —
will not be won by machines,
but by human beings who refuse to simplify the world in order to feel safe.
Continue.
Thinking itself remains an act of resistance.