The deity of "X.com"

In recent years, we’ve seen a notable cultural change with the decline of traditional religious beliefs and the emergence of various secular ideologies. This shift prompts us to look at how the social media platform "X.com," which has 250 million daily active users, operates like a new religious movement. By examining "X" in this way, we can better understand the passionate interactions of its users and what this means for social cohesion.

The deity of "X"

At the heart of this digital congregation lies the question of who or what serves as the "god" of "X." Unlike traditional religions with defined deities, "X" embodies a more complex divinity. The platform itself, the algorithms that curate content, and influential figures—such as popular users like Elon Musk or founders—serve as focal points of worship. Users exhibit a form of devotion to these elements, often attributing meaning and authority to trending topics and popular posts, creating a worship-like environment around the platform. 

We only need to look at how Andrew Tate is persuading young men on X to be misogynistic and embrace toxic masculinity. As a recent convert to Islam, he often uses his new identity to frame his views, presenting them as aligned with traditional values. Through social media, he promotes a distorted view of success, equating power and wealth with domination over women. His messaging exploits insecurities and reinforces harmful stereotypes, creating an echo chamber where disrespectful attitudes are normalised. This influence can lead to a generation that undervalues mutual respect and equality in relationships, ultimately perpetuating cycles of misogyny and unhealthy masculinity.

Engagement on "X" can be likened to religious rituals. Users partake in practices such as sharing posts (akin to spreading the gospel), liking and retweeting (similar to fellowship), and participating in trending hashtags (akin to communal prayers). These actions foster a sense of belonging and communal identity, reinforcing shared beliefs and values. The platform’s unique features create a space for ritualistic interaction that mirrors traditional religious gatherings.

The interactions on "X" can be compared to church services or community meetings. Just as congregations gather to share faith and support one another, users come together in online spaces to discuss, debate, and promote prevailing narratives. This virtual assembly can foster a sense of community but also creates echo chambers that exclude dissenting voices, much like the divisions seen within traditional religious contexts.

The ideological tenets of "X" are akin to religious doctrines. Users often adhere to core beliefs that dictate acceptable behaviours and opinions. These narratives can create a dogmatic environment where questioning or dissent is met with hostility. The platform’s culture reinforces specific values and ideologies, similar to the way religious teachings shape moral frameworks in traditional communities.

On "X," the repercussions for dissenting from the dominant narratives can be severe. Just as traditional religions may excommunicate heretics, users who challenge prevailing ideologies often face public backlash, cancellation, or ostracism. This phenomenon reflects a culture of conformity that can stifle critical thinking and genuine dialogue, mirroring the pressures found within certain religious communities.  

Consider when a priest or church leader for example in the Anglican diocese of Sydney presents an alternative interpretation that supports female leadership, the reaction can be severe. Many congregants, feeling pressured to conform to the established norm, may voice their disapproval or even campaign for the priests removal. This creates an environment where questioning the dominant narrative is discouraged, leading to an echo chamber where only one perspective is heard.

"X" significantly influences societal norms and morality. Much like religious texts that provide moral guidance, the trending topics and dominant conversations on "X" shape public opinion and moral standards. Instances where "X" has led to social changes—such as movements for racial justice or climate action—illustrate its power to redefine collective moral priorities.

The communal aspects of "X" often conflict with the individualism prevalent in modern society. Users seek validation through likes and shares, reflecting a desire for communal recognition. This quest for belonging can shape users’ identities, creating a paradox where individuals are drawn to collective identities while grappling with personal expression.

The rituals and practices of "X" can be compared to those of traditional religions. The search for validation through social media mirrors the religious quest for spiritual fulfilment or the "truth". Users may find a sense of purpose in their online interactions, yet the superficial nature of these exchanges can detract from deeper, more meaningful connections.

The spiritual guidance offered by religious texts and communities starkly contrasts with the often chaotic and superficial nature of social media interaction. The noise of constant updates, conspiracy theories and opinions can drown out the search for deeper truths, leading users to navigate a landscape that prioritises sensationalism over substance.

At the heart of this discussion is the idea of "suicidal empathy." Unlike deep empathy, which fosters understanding and encourages the well-being of society, suicidal empathy appears compassionate on the surface but ultimately leads to destructive outcomes. It’s a shallow form of empathy that prioritises individual feelings over collective well-being, often resulting in divisiveness and societal fragmentation—much like a tweet that seeks likes and retweets rather than fostering meaningful dialogue.

Suicidal empathy, as articulated by Dr. Gad Saad, Author of The Parasitic Mind: How Infectious Ideas Are Killing Common Sense, refers to a misfiring of our natural capacity for empathy, where excessive or misguided compassion leads individuals to prioritise the feelings of certain groups at the expense of broader societal well-being. This phenomenon is exacerbated by "parasitic thinking," which involves adopting harmful ideas that detract from individual and collective progress. Together, these concepts create what Saad calls a "perfect cocktail" that can erode societal cohesion, resulting in increased polarisation and a rejection of critical thinking. With approximately 250 million daily users on "X," the platform amplifies these dynamics, as the rapid spread of tweets can lead to a mob mentality, where dissenting opinions are often drowned out in the quest for validation and conformity.

Here is a video shared on X created by the Dor Brothers titled "Lies Wide Shut," which has garnered millions of views and promotes a theory about a one-world government. This video exemplifies how sensational content can rapidly spread on the platform.

Biblical perspectives on empathy

In the Bible, empathy is often emphasised as a vital aspect of one’s community and moral living. Verses like Romans 12:15—"Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep"—illustrate the importance of deep, genuine empathy that seeks to understand and uplift others. This contrasts sharply with the notion of suicidal empathy, which prioritises superficial compassion over collective well-being, leading to division.

The dangers of shallow empathy mirror biblical warnings against hypocrisy and self-righteousness. In Matthew 7:5, Jesus cautions against removing the speck from another's eye while ignoring the plank in one's own, a metaphor that resonates with the current tendency to adopt a narrow view of morality that can alienate rather than unite. This self-serving form of empathy often leads to a culture of judgement, reminiscent of the very issues Christ addressed during His ministry.

Navigating the modern landscape

Consider the backlash against free speech on university campuses, where efforts to protect marginalised voices sometimes result in the suppression of differing viewpoints. This creates an environment where only certain narratives are permitted, fostering echo chambers that stifle critical discourse. As we navigate through the complexities of modern life, it becomes crucial to examine where this type of empathy originates and how it is perpetuated in a society increasingly devoid of traditional religious frameworks.

Historically, religion and Christianity have served as a moral guide and a source of community for many people. As these institutions have declined, a vacuum has formed. Aristotle famously said, "nature abhors a vacuum," suggesting that without traditional beliefs, new ideologies rush in to fill the space. This is where "woke" culture comes into play—a movement aimed at addressing social justice issues, but it can sometimes take on a rigidity and fervour that feels reminiscent of religious zeal. While many supporters have noble intentions and genuinely seek equality and justice, the movement can also be polarising and may lead to alienation rather than unity.

The danger of platforms like X is that people can become addicted to constantly feeling offended, as it triggers dopamine hits that create a sense of euphoria. This cycle of outrage feeds a desire for self-righteousness and moral superiority, making it pleasurable to engage in conflict and validation. As Tim Kreider noted in his NY Times op-ed, “outrage is like a lot of other things that feel good but, over time, devour us from the inside out. Except it’s even more insidious than most vices because we don’t even consciously acknowledge that it’s a pleasure. We prefer to think of it as a disagreeable but fundamentally healthy reaction to negative stimuli, like pain or nausea, rather than admit that it’s a shameful kick we eagerly indulge again and again, like compulsive masturbation” (Manson, The Subtle Art of Not Giving a Fck*).

The Transformation of Twitter to "X"

Adding to this cultural landscape is the transformation of Twitter into X. This radical shift from the innocent bird logo to a stark "X" symbolises a deeper change, reflecting not just a rebranding but a movement toward a more ambiguous, even darker, interpretation of social discourse.

In semiotics—the study of signs and symbols—every element carries potential meaning. The bird, a symbol of innocence and gentleness, has been replaced by "X," which is laden with connotations of rebellion, danger, pornography, and moral ambiguity. The "X" serves as a marker that challenges norms and invites a more provocative engagement with the world.

This shift reflects a cultural trend where boundaries are increasingly tested. In our contemporary landscape, "X" can symbolise crossing lines, whether in terms of risk-taking behaviour or moral transgression. It resonates with youth culture's desire for unconventionality and rebellion, while also hinting at darker undertones that demand attention. The site's policy on “adult content,” for example, now makes it clear that X not only permits but encourages such posts.

 The religious undertones of secular ideologies

What’s particularly striking about the rise of these secular ideologies is their religious undertone. The fervency with which proponents defend their beliefs, often shunning dissenting views, mirrors the behaviour seen in traditional religious groups. Just as adherents of established religions are resistant to questioning core tenets, those engaged in woke culture can display similar resistance to differing opinions. An example of this adherence to ideological purity within secular movements can be seen in the backlash against the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON). This gathering was formed as a response to the perceived liberal drift in certain branches of the Anglican Church, particularly regarding issues like LGBTQ+ inclusion and women's ordination.

This transformation raises the question: Are we trading one form of rigidity for another? While traditional religions offered structured beliefs and a sense of community, the decline of religious affiliation has led to many empty pews in churches across the West. In their place, new secular ideologies often emerge, providing equally rigid frameworks founded in contemporary social issues.

Just as empty pews signify a retreat from traditional communal spaces, the rise of fervent ideological movements can indicate a search for belonging and meaning in a rapidly changing world. However, this shift can also lead to increased polarisation and division, as people cling to rigid beliefs that leave little room for dialogue or understanding, ultimately replacing one form of rigidity with another.

Why are the pews are empty? well many have found themselves drawn into the allure of social media and technology, particularly platforms like "X." This digital landscape offers a sense of community and validation that can overshadow traditional religious gatherings. As users seek connection and affirmation online, the profound sense of belonging once found in faith communities often gets replaced by fleeting digital interactions. This shift highlights a broader cultural trend where spiritual fulfilment is increasingly sought in the fast-paced, often superficial world of social media, leaving many to navigate their beliefs in isolation. It’s no surprise, then, that this disconnect contributes to rising feelings of loneliness and anxiety, which is why the world is increasingly medicated with antidepressants.

It’s important to acknowledge the other side of the argument: the portrayal of "X" users as a monolithic group risks overlooking the diversity of thought and experience on the platform. Many users actively challenge dominant narratives and engage in critical discussions, but the prevailing culture often creates an echo chamber that feels cult-like. In these environments, dissenting opinions can be quickly silenced, fostering a conformity similar to what is seen in traditional religious communities. This situation underscores the need to recognise the complexity of user interactions, where not everyone subscribes to the same ideologies or practices, and where meaningful dialogue can still arise amidst the pressures of conformity. 

 Cultivating meaningful empathy

As we engage with these ideas, it’s important to recognise that not all expressions of empathy are created equal. Deep empathy involves understanding others' experiences and striving for solutions that benefit the greater good. In contrast, suicidal empathy may stem from a desire to be seen as compassionate while neglecting the broader implications of one’s actions. 

For example, I picked up today’s paper here in Melbourne; the headline was “Woke and divisive: Justice department staff to get white privilege training.” This initiative aims to address important social issues but has sparked controversy and dissent, illustrating how attempts to foster understanding can inadvertently deepen divisions and alienate individuals who feel targeted or marginalised by such programs. This highlights the delicate balance needed in pursuing empathy and social justice without falling into the traps of rigidity and exclusion.

In a society where individualism is often prioritised, we must strive to cultivate deep empathy that encourages meaningful dialogue and understanding. This is especially crucial in discussions surrounding social justice, where it’s easy to fall into the trap of superficial empathy that does more harm than good.

As we grapple with the decline of religion and the rise of secular ideologies, it’s vital to reflect on the nature of our empathy. Are we cultivating a deep, meaningful understanding of one another, or are we succumbing to the allure of shallow empathy that ultimately undermines societal cohesion? The shift from Twitter's bird to X serves as a powerful metaphor for this cultural evolution. The starkness of "X" embodies the temptation to embrace extremes, reflecting a growing appetite for risk-taking and moral transgression in our engagement.

However, it is crucial to recognise "X" for what it truly is—a false god in the landscape of contemporary belief systems. While many users seek validation, community, and purpose through this platform, we must remain vigilant against the seductive pull of a digital deity that prioritises sensationalism over substance. The allure of "X" can lead us away from meaningful connections and deeper truths, promoting a culture of division rather than unity. 

As we navigate the complexities of modern communication and social norms, maybe we should aim to foster a culture that values genuine empathy, encourages open dialogue, and seeks the common good. However, we must be wary of the dangers that "X" represents: a potential descent into chaos where provocative rhetoric overshadows thoughtful conversation. 

The challenge lies in transforming our empathy into a force for healing and unity in an increasingly fragmented world, rather than allowing it to fuel division and discontent. As we navigate these complexities, the biblical call for deep empathy and understanding remains important. In a world where individualism often reigns, cultivating empathy that fosters dialogue and genuine connection is more important than ever. The challenge is to ensure that our empathy aligns with the greater good, echoing the teachings of Christ to love one another (John 13:34).

Ultimately, we should consider moving our families away from platforms like "X," focusing instead on reading our Bible and engaging with our faith communities and promoting what is true, honourable, just, pure, pleasing, commendable, excellent, and worthy of praise (Philippians 4:8). In doing so, we can cultivate deeper connections and uphold values that truly foster understanding and unity. I walked away from social media and deleted all my accounts, and I’ve never felt better. 

Check out this video by Reagan Rose titled "Why I Quit Social Media (Christian Perspective)." It really struck a chord—definitely some food for thought!

---
The writer is an author and associate member of ISCSAT and has been studying the application of technology in Christianity.