That’s the “digital fetishization” I’m talking about — and “we” as people are not giant tech companies pushing a dystopian vision of interaction on others. That vision comes from the big tech companies, a kind of top down commandment of societal direction accompanied by impossible to ignore salaries that still manages to instill uneasiness in those who build inside of the system. Except, for those who won’t see it for what it is. “Give it a chance, it’ll help the disabled.” “If you want a better future, you’ll have to accept this worthless phase as we step towards it.”

It’s why I call it a fetish — people regurgitate the same mass media points presented in articles to defend the system of mass media even while their whole worldview is usurped by that media. Profilism at it’s finest.

The issue is that tech is being used to insert an interface in every aspect of our lives. This creates an approximation of life but within the control of vapid and sometimes sinister overlord companies who definitely do not appear to be worried about the resulting mental health and societal consequences.

Life is not a proxy, and it’s not worth sacrificing our connection so that we can live in a pessimistic vision of society that forces a monetized corporation as a proxy for every sense we have and every connection we make.

I’m no saying it’s all bad or something banal. I’m just saying these companies seem to be architects of deeply pessimistic visions of the future and exploitationist in their utopian futurism.