I wrote this in February 2019. It was about activism, social engineering, and how movements are manufactured. Six years later the pattern is louder than ever.
Every successful social movement follows the same playbook:
- Frame the cause as positive and altruistic
- Create a controlled opposition that can never win (their stance is always "negative")
- Hit the right emotional triggers at the right time
"Save the trees" in the 2000s → paperless world → mass adoption of computers. Who funded that push? Probably the tech companies who benefited most.
"Stop using plastic straws" → anti-plastic movement → electric vehicles → energy dependence shift.
The 2025 playbook
We're watching the same thing with AI right now. "AI will save us from drudge work" is the positive framing. The opposition ("AI will destroy jobs") can never win because they sound like luddites. The real question is: who benefits from the behavioural change being engineered right now?
The pattern hasn't changed. Only the product has.
When you see a movement gaining mainstream traction, don't ask "is this good?" — ask "who profits from the behaviour change this creates?" Follow the incentive, not the slogan.