Off-Modern Onions

An Introduction: Or, Justifying My Presence Here

I’d been thinking for a while about leaving Substack—and then after snooping around the alternatives, settled on this place. As an introductory post, then, I thought I’d try to lay out my reasons for the whole move.

First: the leaving itself. After much hullabaloo that you probably already know about regarding Substack and its refusal to deplatform writers I’ll very broadly refer to as frightening right-wingers, I decided I couldn’t stick around.[^1] At first, I wondered what difference my gesture would make, not being someone who was earning money from my little newsletter, and well aware that I write the kind of stuff that’s hardly eligible (or aiming for) influencer status. And then there’s the fact that the enshittification[^2] of everything digital, virtual, what have you, seems increasingly inescapable; why not just give in, and keep grumbling in an attempt to assuage my discomfort at aiding and abetting big data’s stab at putting us in neat boxes and selling them?

The Ethical Quick and Dirty

There’s the problem: I’m unable to evade my sometimes-official, usually-unpaid vocation as an ethicist—and within that general calling, even more unable to shake the hold Simon Critchley’s notion of the infinite demand has long had on me.[^3] Far too basically, that demand says that whatever the situation, even and especially in an impossible one, in which you know no work of yours is going to make a real change, you are ethically called to do your unstinting best to work toward that change. It feels somewhat akin to what Martin Luther King Jr. stated in so many ways, as so often noted in his acknowledgment about “the arc of the moral universe”: that though it “bends toward justice,” that arc is (exceedingly) long.[^4] You often won’t be around to see the results of your work, but if you do nothing, that arc isn’t going to bend; you’ll just let the situation remain undisturbed at best, and grow more deeply entrenched at worst.

Such views or assertions, and the sustained action required to maintain commitment to them, are hardly concerned with—may even be antithetical to the charms of—convenience. And there’s a reason for that; convenience, after all, is often exactly the numbing agent required to reinforce our sense of futility. Everything’s so hard already, and no one’s going to do anything meaningful about privacy laws, regulation of hate speech (or maybe even what results from it), the monetization of everything, corporate monopolies, decreasing wages and crappy labor practices,... So why don’t we just make life as easy on ourselves as possible, since nothing’s going to change in the end? It's just a stupid newsletter, after all. And then we’re back to the infinite demand, and other encouragements along the line of Václav Havel’s assertion that nothing is lost in the memory of Being,[^5] or more Hindu-philosophical nonattachment to results while, à la Critchley, being required to do what you can. All dutiful in a way, all something Mr. Duty himself, Immanuel Kant, might agree with. Pick (or pick at) your favorite; until I have the time to elaborate more fully on each of my moral guides, I think you get the idea.

The Numbers Versus the Point

But, I’ve already heard, you’re abandoning—and even worse, not “growing” your audience!! You’re giving up such great opportunities to get subscribers—to be exposed! Forsooth! Maybe so; maybe I’m missing out on a lot of LinkedIn “impressions,” but I’m not even entirely sure what that variety of “eyeball” would mean. Certainly not that your post has been read, much less appreciated. Maybe you won’t be clapped at by someone on Medium, and maybe you’ll miss the twenty cents that’ll earn you. But ditching all this writing-while-striving also means you won’t have to spend your time attending to bad-faith commentary, or doing all the extraneous and stressful things—all wrapped up under the umbrella of what I’ll generally call marketing—involved in trying to gain paid followers, “stick to brand,” get noticed by as many people as possible, and all that jazz. If you just want to write and explore, and maybe write along with and for a few people who appreciate it, hell, that’s great.

And here’s the thing with exposure: I get the sense that people who tell you to be everywhere as much as possible, “putting yourself out there,” etc., forget there are some pretty negative, or at least questionable, meanings of the term. The most obvious, of course, is sort of the creepy logical end of self-promotion: exposing far too much of yourself, with offense and disgust and maybe even harm piling up all around. But then there’s also the variant that cautions you about spending too much time in the elements, lest you permanently damage your soft tissue—or just freeze to death—in the cold. Those elements are usually weather-related—but I like to think, too, that too much time exposed to weird social media environments and populations that play for notice at all cost only results in the deadening of (I’ll go ahead and say it) the soul’s soft tissue.

It reminds me of the arguments I always somehow walked in on in grad school, where many of my classmates were either Christian clerics or practical theologians, always fretting about the decline of churchgoing in the US. No one’s interested in church, or what we say or do! How do we bring people in? How do we get them interested? We have to meet people where they’re at! The handwringing and the hip solutions always sounded to me like a combination of giving in to the very “world” whose humanity-denying practices the church liked to criticize, and getting people in the doors only to pull a bait and switch. Wait! We thought we were here for a pizza party—now we’re sitting through a sermon? Instead of concentrating on living out their truth and letting that be enough—and attractive enough an example to those for whom joining in or participation or whatever would be meaningful—this crowd seemed to be watering itself and its own messages down in order to be the most popular gathering place in town, or at least popular enough not to feel like middle school outcasts.

What I’m trying to say with that bad example is, in other words, what are we all doing with so much connection? What does it all result in? If you can make a living taking photos of yourself, and can handle the constant performance, then great, do your thing! But as for me and my virtual house, I think I’d just like the time to explore, quietly and simply, without invading anyone’s privacy or flashing ads or unwittingly training some AI tool thanks to my own work putting words together. I’ll give it a shot, then; here goes!




[^1]:Something wonky's happening with my attempts to provide an in-text link to the article by Leigh McGowran, "Substack co-founder defends giving Nazis a platform," siliconrepublic, 21 December 2023. Here, then, is the link if you want to use it: https://www.siliconrepublic.com/business/substack-defends-nazis-content.
I ditched Twitter a while ago for very similar reasons, and haven’t once lamented my move to Mastodon.
[^2]:I'm pretty sure that article is Cory Doctorow’s initial discussion of enshittification. “Social Quitting,” Medium, 15 November 2022.
[^3]:See Simon Critchley, Infinitely Demanding: Ethics of Commitment, Politics of Resistance (New York: Verso, 2008). He follows up on and further develops the idea in Simon Critchley, The Faith of the Faithless: Experiments in Political Theology (New York: Verso, 2012).
[^4]:According to the Smithsonian, the phrase was part of a speech at the National Cathedral. Martin Luther King Jr.,
“Remaining Awake Through a Great Revolution,” 31 March 1968.
[^5]:Havel talks a lot about this in Letters to Olga: June 1979–September 1982, translated by Paul Wilson (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1989).