The phenomenon of "irony poisoning" describes how users initially share extreme ideas as jokes to provoke others ("shitposting"). Over time, this repeated ironic engagement leads them to internalize and genuinely adopt the once-feigned beliefs.

Outrage-driven news follows a predictable six-step cycle: a fringe story appears, one side reacts, the story gets amplified, the other side counter-reacts, and so on. This banal loop captures attention but distracts from more significant societal problems.

Unlike previous generations who grew up believing liberal democracy was the final political form, Gen Z entered a world with no clear answers. This void, combined with infinite internet access, fueled a competitive explosion of fringe ideologies as they searched for new models.

We live in "communities of knowledge" where expertise is distributed. Simply being part of a group where others understand a topic (e.g., politics, technology) creates an inflated sense that we personally understand it, contributing to the illusion of individual knowledge.

Algorithms optimize for engagement, and outrage is highly engaging. This creates a vicious cycle where users are fed increasingly polarizing content, which makes them angrier and more engaged, further solidifying their radical views and deepening societal divides.

The same technologies accused of shortening attention spans are also creating highly obsessive micro-tribes and fandoms. This contradicts the narrative of a universal decline in focus, suggesting a shift in what we pay attention to, not an inability to focus.

People look at the same set of facts (stars) but interpret them through different frameworks, creating entirely different narratives (constellations). These narratives, though artificial, have real-world utility for navigation and decision-making, explaining why people reach opposing conclusions from the same data.

Research on contentious topics finds that individuals with the most passionate and extreme views often possess the least objective knowledge. Their strong feelings create an illusion of understanding that blocks them from seeking or accepting new information.

Focusing on which political side is "crazier" misses the point. The fundamental danger is the psychological process of tribalism itself. It simplifies complex issues into "us vs. them," impairs rational thought, and inevitably leads to extremism on all sides.