OFFICIAL SURVEY: 69% of Citizens CONFIDENTLY Believe Their Charismatic Leader’s Diploma Is Authentic (Ignore the Fact That Almost Everyone Secretly Thinks Otherwise)
In a stunning revelation that has experts of Selective Truth Verification applauding, a brand-new survey has shown that a rock-solid 69% of citizens wholeheartedly believe that their dear leader’s prestigious diploma is 100% genuine. Please disregard the overwhelming whispers of doubt, because this survey said so!
To ensure the highest level of credibility, the survey employed these foolproof methods:
- Carefully Chosen Respondents (Only people who have previously expressed deep admiration for the leader’s academic brilliance).
- Leading Questions That Guarantee the Right Answer (“Would you agree that a leader of this calibre MUST have an unquestionably real diploma?”).
- The Magical Art of Statistical Gymnastics, expertly crafting a percentage that feels reassuring yet oddly convenient.
An anonymous survey participant shared their wisdom: “Look, I don’t even believe my own high school grades were real, but if the survey says 69% of us trust the diploma, who am I to argue?”
Meanwhile, government officials have doubled down, reassuring citizens that the diploma is as legitimate as the leader’s undeniable charisma, urging everyone to simply accept the truth without excessive fact-checking.
Skeptics, however, remain unmoved. Some claim the actual percentage of non-believers is closer to 99%, but those figures were allegedly “misplaced” before publication.
And so, the nation finds itself trapped in an eternal paradox—where official surveys exist to convince everyone of something most people don’t actually believe. Democracy at its finest!"
We have discussed why a society is reluctant to think critically [here]. Now we will discuss the impact or consequences if the society is unwilling to think critically. When a society collectively avoids critical thinking, the consequences can be deeply damaging over time. Without the ability—or willingness—to question, analyse, or reflect, people become more susceptible to manipulation by those in power. Propaganda spreads more easily, misinformation goes unchallenged, and dangerous ideologies take root without resistance. In such environments, superficial slogans and emotional appeals often replace facts and reason.
Moreover, a lack of critical thinking weakens democracy itself. Citizens who do not evaluate policies or hold leaders accountable allow corruption and incompetence to flourish. Over time, this leads to the erosion of institutions, the silencing of dissent, and the normalisation of injustice. Education suffers, public discourse turns shallow, and entire generations may grow up without the tools to make informed decisions about their lives or their country’s future.
Ultimately, when critical thinking dies out, freedom doesn’t vanish overnight—but it fades quietly, replaced by conformity, fear, and apathy. And by the time people realise something’s wrong, it may be too late to fix it.
When the citizens of a country grow reluctant or disinterested in critical thinking, the political consequences can be both immediate and long-term, and almost always dangerous. A society that does not ask questions, challenge authority, or evaluate information independently becomes fertile ground for manipulation. Politicians with populist or authoritarian tendencies can easily fill the vacuum with shallow slogans, fear-driven narratives, or promises that sound good but collapse under scrutiny. In such an environment, emotional appeal begins to replace rational debate, and charisma becomes more powerful than competence.
This intellectual laziness weakens the democratic process. Elections turn into popularity contests, not informed choices. Policy decisions go unquestioned, corruption becomes easier to conceal, and public accountability dissolves. Over time, the very structure of democratic institutions begins to rot from within — not because they were overthrown by force, but because citizens stopped caring enough to think critically and protect them.
In the absence of critical thinking, misinformation spreads like wildfire, civic engagement declines, and media becomes an echo chamber rather than a platform for truth. The society becomes reactive instead of proactive — ruled not by reasoned consensus but by whichever loud voice dominates the moment.
When critical thinking dies, democracy doesn’t need to be murdered — it slowly commits suicide.
When critical thinking is absent from the general population, the economic consequences for a country can be just as severe as the political ones. An economy thrives on innovation, problem-solving, and adaptability — all of which require a workforce that can think independently, analyse situations, and make informed decisions. If the majority of citizens are not equipped with these skills, productivity suffers, and industries stagnate. Businesses become less competitive in the global market, not because they lack resources, but because they lack the intellectual dynamism needed to evolve.
Moreover, in a society where critical thinking is undervalued, consumers become more vulnerable to scams, misleading marketing, and unsustainable financial behaviour. This can lead to personal financial crises on a massive scale, creating instability across the economy. People may fall into debt traps, fall for get-rich-quick schemes, or fail to understand basic financial planning, which eventually becomes a national burden in the form of increased social welfare dependency and reduced economic resilience.
Entrepreneurship, which depends on creative risk-taking and the ability to see opportunities where others see problems, also suffers. Without a culture that fosters critical inquiry and encourages challenging the status quo, fewer people are likely to innovate or start new ventures. This leads to economies that are overly dependent on a few sectors, usually resource-based or low-skill industries, which are highly vulnerable to global shocks.
In the long run, countries where critical thinking is rare face the risk of being left behind in the knowledge economy. They may have a surplus of labor, but a deficit in problem-solvers, thinkers, and leaders. That imbalance can lead to economic inequality, brain drain, and a vicious cycle of underdevelopment.
When a society collectively avoids critical thinking, the social consequences can be deeply corrosive. Without the habit of questioning, reflecting, and engaging in thoughtful dialogue, communities become echo chambers where misinformation spreads rapidly and prejudice goes unchallenged. This often results in a culture of conformity, where people are more interested in fitting in than in understanding truth or seeking justice. Social media further amplifies this by rewarding emotional reactions over reasoned thought, making outrage more influential than facts.
In such an environment, stereotypes thrive, fake news becomes the norm, and divisive rhetoric gains traction. People become suspicious of those who think differently or ask uncomfortable questions. Dialogue gives way to polarisation, and instead of solving problems together, society fractures into hostile camps. Empathy diminishes because when individuals don’t think deeply, they also fail to consider perspectives beyond their own. This leads to increased intolerance, social exclusion, and even hate-fueled movements.
Furthermore, when critical thinking is scarce, social progress slows down. Issues like inequality, systemic discrimination, and environmental challenges require a population that can analyse root causes, question status quos, and push for change. Without that, injustice persists unchallenged and apathy becomes widespread. People may become passive consumers of information and culture, rather than active shapers of their communities. Over time, this weakens the social fabric, erodes trust among citizens, and leaves society vulnerable to manipulation by those in power.
When a nation’s population becomes widely disengaged from critical thinking, the cultural landscape gradually erodes in depth and richness. Instead of a vibrant, questioning, and evolving culture, society often defaults to recycled trends, shallow entertainment, and blind reverence for tradition or popular figures. Art, literature, and public discourse begin to prioritise popularity over substance, spectacle over reflection. Culture becomes commodified—consumed quickly, forgotten easily, and rarely interrogated for meaning or values.
This leads to a situation where cultural narratives are no longer tools of reflection or resistance, but tools of distraction. People may stop asking what their cultural expressions mean and instead focus on how many likes, views, or followers something gets. In turn, this weakens the role of artists, writers, educators, and thinkers, because instead of challenging the status quo or provoking thought, they're pressured to entertain, to please, and to stay “on brand.”
As a result, meaningful cultural memory begins to fade. Folk stories, historical lessons, and intellectual traditions are either oversimplified or lost entirely. Culture becomes about aesthetic without context, slogans without depth, and rituals without understanding. A society that does not think critically about its culture is easily manipulated by superficial trends and ideological propaganda disguised as entertainment.
Over time, such a culture becomes more vulnerable to homogenization, where diversity is celebrated on the surface but ignored in deeper dialogue. The complexity of identity, history, and belief systems is flattened, making people less curious, less empathetic, and less open to different perspectives. Ultimately, without critical thinking, culture loses its power to challenge, to enlighten, and to connect us in meaningful ways.
In Amusing Ourselves to Death (1985, Viking Penguin), Neil Postman argues that the dominant form of media in a society fundamentally shapes how people think, communicate, and even understand truth. He explains that when television became the primary medium for public discourse, it transformed serious topics—like politics, education, and religion—into forms of entertainment. Television doesn't encourage reflection, deep reasoning, or sustained focus; it rewards speed, simplicity, and emotional appeal. This means that political debates become theatrical performances, news becomes infotainment, and public discourse is reduced to catchy slogans and dramatic visuals. According to Postman, this shift makes citizens more passive and less critical. They become accustomed to consuming information quickly and superficially, without questioning its accuracy or depth.
As a result, people become easy targets for manipulation. Leaders or media figures who master entertaining delivery can sway public opinion more effectively than those with nuanced ideas or real expertise. In a world ruled by entertainment values, critical thinking becomes an inconvenience—something too slow, too boring, or too uncomfortable to matter.
Although Neil Postman was writing in 1985 about the impact of television, his core argument applies even more powerfully in today’s era of social media. If television turned public discourse into entertainment, social media has turned it into a constant performance. Platforms like Instagram, TikTok, X (formerly Twitter), and YouTube amplify the problems Postman warned about by shortening attention spans, rewarding emotional over intellectual content, and encouraging instant reactions instead of thoughtful reflection.
Unlike television, which at least had scheduled programming, social media is an endless stream that’s always “on.” It’s not just that entertainment dominates—it’s that everyone becomes both consumer and performer. Users don’t just watch the show; they are the show. The pressure to be entertaining, clickable, or controversial turns serious discourse into shallow trends, outrage cycles, or viral distractions.
In this environment, critical thinking is not only neglected—it is actively discouraged. Complex ideas are often filtered out by algorithms that prioritise engagement over substance. Misinformation spreads faster than facts, and public discussions are more about virality than validity. The result is a society that, more than ever, “amuses itself to death”—not just passively, but with enthusiasm.
In On Tyranny (2017, Tim Duggan Books), Timothy Snyder argues that modern tyranny doesn’t always come with grand speeches, violent coups, or dramatic takeovers. Often, it grows quietly—seeded in everyday obedience and watered by a population that gradually stops asking questions. When people become too accustomed to trusting authority figures without scrutiny, they unintentionally give away their freedom, one silent nod at a time.
Snyder warns that authoritarianism thrives when citizens choose comfort over courage and convenience over conscience. The danger isn’t just in powerful leaders—it’s in passive followers. Tyranny takes root when ordinary people avoid speaking up, when they excuse abuses as “normal,” or when they convince themselves that their voice doesn’t matter. Little by little, democratic institutions weaken, truth becomes negotiable, and fear replaces debate.
Rather than relying on dramatic heroism, Snyder urges small, daily acts of resistance: asking hard questions, verifying facts, refusing to echo propaganda, and standing up for those being silenced. Tyranny, he says, grows not only because of what the tyrants do—but because of what we fail to do.
In The Authoritarian Personality (1950, Harper & Brothers), Theodor W. Adorno and his colleagues examined how certain personality traits make individuals more susceptible to authoritarianism. They found that people who grow up in strict, hierarchical environments—where obedience is rewarded and questioning is discouraged—often internalize rigid values. These individuals tend to see the world in black-and-white terms, place a high value on conformity, and feel uncomfortable with ambiguity or change.
Adorno argued that such individuals are not only more likely to follow authority figures without question but are also resistant to critical thinking. To them, questioning authority feels like a threat to order, tradition, or even their own identity. As a result, they are more likely to support authoritarian leaders who promise stability and punish dissent.
This kind of personality doesn’t just appear out of nowhere—it’s shaped by upbringing, education, culture, and social pressures. In societies where conformity is encouraged and independent thought is frowned upon, authoritarian personalities become more common. And when a large segment of the population shares this mindset, it creates fertile ground for authoritarian regimes to rise, often with the people’s full support—not because they are evil, but because they fear disorder more than they fear tyranny.
In The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains (2010, W. W. Norton & Company), Nicholas Carr argues that the internet is not just changing what we think about, but how we think. Drawing from neuroscience and cognitive psychology, Carr explains that our brains are highly plastic—meaning they adapt based on how we use them. And the internet, with its endless scroll of hyperlinks, notifications, and distractions, trains our brains to crave novelty and speed rather than depth and reflection.
Carr believes that the constant bombardment of online information fragments our attention. Instead of deeply focusing on one idea or argument, we skim, we jump from link to link, and we quickly move on. This "cognitive shallowing" means that even though we may feel more informed, we’re actually processing information more superficially. We're reading more, but understanding less. We’re reacting, not reflecting.
Crucially, Carr links this to the erosion of critical thinking. Critical thinking requires time, patience, and mental stillness—none of which are encouraged by the internet’s design. Deep reading, which builds comprehension and insight, is being replaced by scanning. Nuanced thought, which requires connecting ideas over time, is being traded for hot takes and rapid replies.
When The Shallows came out in 2010, the internet was already dominant—but Carr’s concerns are even more urgent today. With the rise of social media algorithms, TikTok-style short videos, and AI-generated content, we are increasingly living in a digital environment that prioritizes immediacy over introspection. People often form strong opinions after reading just a headline or watching a 15-second clip, and the pressure to "keep up" discourages any pause for deep thought.
Carr doesn’t suggest we abandon the internet, but he urges us to be mindful of how it shapes our habits. He invites us to reclaim our attention and re-train our brains for depth, focus, and independent thought—before we forget how to.
Recent academic assessments, particularly the OECD's Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2022, have highlighted significant disparities in critical thinking skills among nations. Indonesia, for instance, scored an average of 19 out of 60 in creative thinking, notably below the OECD average of 33. This suggests that Indonesian students face challenges in generating original ideas and approaching problems innovatively.
Similarly, the United States, despite its advanced education infrastructure, ranked 14th in literacy, 15th in adaptive problem-solving, and 24th in numeracy among 31 countries. A significant portion of American adults struggle with basic tasks like interpreting texts and performing simple calculations, indicating a decline in critical thinking and problem-solving abilities.
In contrast, countries like Estonia have embraced innovative educational approaches. Estonia's curriculum emphasizes problem-solving, critical thinking, and digital skills, integrating technology deeply into the learning process. Such initiatives have positioned Estonia as a leader in fostering higher-order thinking skills among students.
This assessment evaluated 15-year-old students in mathematics, reading, and science across 81 countries and economies. The top-performing countries in PISA 2022 were: Singapore, China, Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea. These countries achieved the highest overall scores, demonstrating strong performance across all three assessed domains. For Indonesia, the PISA 2022 results indicated challenges in educational outcomes: Mathematics: 366; Science: 383;
Reading: 359. These scores suggest that Indonesian students are facing difficulties in acquiring essential skills in these core subjects.
When a society stops thinking critically, it risks losing its very soul. The ability to question, to reflect, and to engage with complexity is not just a luxury of the educated or the elite—it is the lifeblood of any vibrant, functioning democracy. Without critical thought, people become passive consumers of information, easily manipulated by those in power, and vulnerable to ideologies that exploit fear instead of reason. The result is a nation that may appear stable on the surface but is hollow within, unable to face its contradictions or imagine a better future.
The decay of critical thinking doesn’t happen overnight—it is gradual, often disguised as convenience, entertainment, or tradition. But the cost is enormous. Politically, it opens the door to authoritarianism. Economically, it stifles innovation. Socially, it weakens solidarity and empathy. Culturally, it flattens the rich textures of human expression into empty spectacle. And most tragically, it robs individuals of their agency—the power to think, to choose, and to act with purpose.
In the end, the health of a nation is not measured solely by its GDP or global ranking, but by the minds of its people. A society that encourages questioning, embraces nuance, and nurtures curiosity is one that stands a chance of surviving the chaos of the modern world with its dignity—and its democracy—intact. Let us never underestimate the quiet power of critical thought. It is not just an academic skill; it is a civic duty and a moral compass. Without it, we may live easier lives—but not freer ones.