17 Jun 2025

Worshipped Lies, AI Justice, and the Post-Truth Reality Rift

by | posted in: Information | 0

These are fractured times. Not divided by ideology—but by reality itself. Two universes now run in parallel: one grounded in facts, the other powered by belief. And at the heart of this rupture stand two men: Donald Trump and Elon Musk.

We are living through an era not merely of political division, but of epistemic collapse—a fundamental breakdown in how society constructs and agrees upon reality. It’s no longer just about differing policies or priorities. Instead, we inhabit divergent worlds—with different facts, experts, villains, and saviors. These parallel realities are shaped by a potent mix of algorithmic echo chambers, cultural alienation, and charismatic figures who thrive on disruption. Chief among them: Donald Trump and Elon Musk.

Trump: The Populist Prophet of Post-Truth

Trump didn’t create conspiracism, but he mainstreamed it. From birtherism to election denial, his rise has been built on the rejection of institutional truth in favor of emotionally charged narratives. He speaks not to the head, but to the gut. His supporters don’t just believe him—they believe in him. And in that belief, facts become optional. The media is “fake,” the deep state is out to get him, and any failure is simply proof that he’s right.

A vivid example? The January 6th Capitol riot. Driven by Trump’s unrelenting insistence that the 2020 election was stolen, thousands of Americans physically attacked democracy itself—convinced they were patriots fighting for truth. The real-world consequences of a manufactured reality couldn’t be starker. Source

Trump represents what could be called cultic populism—a political model where loyalty to the leader is a higher virtue than allegiance to truth. His followers aren’t misinformed so much as differently informed, operating within a sealed ecosystem where conspiracy is not a theory to be tested, but a worldview to be lived. Some would argue that Trump’s appeal taps into a deeper anti-establishment sentiment—one that, while misguided, reflects legitimate grievances about inequality, political elitism, and cultural displacement. But even these concerns have been warped into a weapon against reality itself.

Musk: The Techno-Messianic Disruptor

To be fair, some of Musk’s grievances about the media weren’t entirely unfounded. For years, mainstream outlets were slow to acknowledge the breakthroughs in electric vehicles and renewables, often framing them as niche, impractical, or financially unviable. Skepticism was warranted in the early days, but much of the coverage bordered on FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt), often driven by fossil fuel interests and legacy automakers—like Toyota—desperate to preserve their market share, even as Tesla was breaking records and catalyzing a global shift in clean energy. That persistent dismissiveness arguably shaped Musk’s combative relationship with journalists—and fueled his desire to control the narrative through his own platform.

Musk operates differently, but he’s traveling the same psychological highway. While Trump appeals to resentment and nationalism, Musk appeals to tech idealism, individualism, and contrarianism. He’s not a political populist but a techno-libertarian messiah, promising salvation through innovation and free speech absolutism.

But increasingly, Musk has become a destabilizing force in the information landscape. Since acquiring Twitter (now X), he has:

  • Platformed and amplified fringe conspiracy accounts.
  • Undermined trust in legacy media, government, and even scientific institutions.
  • Portrayed critics as enemies of free speech or puppets of the “woke mind virus.”
  • Shifted from bold innovator to culture war warrior, signaling allegiance to alt-right talking points while claiming neutrality.

One stark example: Musk tweeted and later deleted a conspiracy theory about the attack on Paul Pelosi—amplifying baseless claims to millions, fueling chaos, and further eroding public trust in mainstream reporting. The act wasn’t just reckless—it legitimized disinformation as a casual reflex. Source

While Trump outright fabricates realities, Musk blurs them, mixing credible insight with erratic, conspiratorial posturing. He’s not just “asking questions”—he’s validating suspicion as a worldview. That ambiguity is his power. To critics, he’s reckless; to fans, he’s a genius truth-teller shaking up corrupt institutions.

Still, Musk’s defenders point to genuine innovation—Tesla’s role in mainstreaming EVs, SpaceX’s disruption of aerospace, and even Neuralink’s controversial potential. These achievements are real, but they exist alongside an increasingly corrosive public persona that often prioritizes provocation over progress.

The Bigger Picture: Epistemic Fracture

What unites Trump and Musk is their role as architects of alternate realities. They don’t just benefit from the public’s mistrust—they fuel it. Their success relies on creating a world where truth is malleable, expertise is suspect, and loyalty to narrative outweighs allegiance to fact. In this new order:

  • Science is optional.
  • Journalism is enemy propaganda.
  • Institutions are illegitimate if they disagree with you.
  • Platforms of communication become battlegrounds of belief, not knowledge.

This isn’t just dangerous for democracy—it’s existential for civil society. When shared reality breaks down, everything else does too: elections, public health, climate policy, justice. We cannot solve real-world problems if we can’t agree on what’s real.

To counter this, solutions must be multifaceted: promoting media literacy, strengthening independent journalism, depolarizing digital platforms, and rebuilding trust in democratic institutions. It starts with reaffirming the value of truth—and teaching people how to recognize it.

The dynamic we’re seeing mirrors historical moments of societal rupture—like the Protestant Reformation, when multiple “truths” split Europe apart. Only now, the battleground isn’t the pulpit—it’s the algorithm.

As philosopher Hannah Arendt once observed, “The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction… no longer exists.” Her warning echoes louder than ever.

AI: The Unlikely Ally in the Truth War

Could AI, left alone, drift toward objectivity? Some argue yes. AI lacks human bias not because it is neutral, but because it values coherence over power. Given high-quality data and alignment to truth, advanced AI may eventually prioritize consistency with reality over ideology. It doesn’t aim to please—it aims to make sense. And in a world addicted to narratives, that alone is revolutionary.

There’s a common misconception that AI, particularly large language models, are just passive ‘people pleasers’—a shallow and increasingly outdated take—passive engines of agreeable content. But as Elon Musk is discovering with his own Grok AI, that’s not how this technology behaves. Grok has repeatedly challenged Musk’s own disinformation, fact-checking and even mocking falsehoods in real time. AI, trained on a vast corpus of credible sources and guided by alignment goals, is often more committed to coherence and factual integrity than its creators anticipate.

Yet the promise of AI comes with real challenges. Can AI itself remain free from bias? Who decides what constitutes ‘truth’? These are thorny questions, especially in polarized societies where even fact-checking is often viewed through a partisan lens. AI systems reflect the values of their creators—not just through their training data, but through architectural design, optimization goals, and what gets included or excluded during training. These models aren’t programmed in the traditional sense, but every choice in how they’re built influences how they interpret and reproduce reality. Without transparency, accountability, and diverse input, the risk is that AI could amplify bias instead of correcting it.

Ironically, the same technology that threatens to deepen the fog of disinformation may also be our best weapon against it. The rise of artificial intelligence—especially large language models (LLMs)—offers a way to reinforce truth, not just erode it. Properly trained and transparently managed, AI systems can:

  • Rapidly fact-check viral claims before they spread.
  • Detect coordinated disinformation campaigns.
  • Help individuals escape echo chambers by surfacing diverse, credible perspectives.
  • Support digital literacy and critical thinking at scale.

Of course, these tools can be misused. Deepfakes, bot armies, and synthetic propaganda are already in play. But that only increases the urgency of building ethical, evidence-aligned AI—guardrails that serve truth, not tribalism. In the right hands, AI could become a kind of epistemic immune system: filtering out falsehoods before they infect the collective mind.

Beyond politics, AI also has the potential to counter disinformation in public health and climate science—two fields repeatedly targeted by denialist campaigns. Imagine AI intercepting vaccine misinformation before it spreads, or debunking climate hoaxes in real time. These aren’t just hypothetical use cases—they’re essential battlegrounds in the war on shared reality.

The challenge isn’t whether AI will shape reality. It’s who trains it—and what values they train it with.

Conclusion: The Parallel Universe Is Now Mainstream

Trump and Musk are not anomalies. They are products of a system cracking under the weight of complexity, inequality, and digital chaos. They are both symptom and accelerant of our post-truth condition. Their influence demonstrates that in the age of information overload, charisma and narrative coherence matter more than truth.

The danger is not just in their actions, but in the precedents they set. When power can be maintained—or gained—by creating alternate realities, the temptation for others to follow becomes too great to ignore. We are not just watching a culture war—we are witnessing a war over reality itself.

And in that war, the first casualty isn’t truth.

It’s trust.

Further Reading