Open the newsletter for White House Watch for free

Your guide to what the American elections mean for the year 2024 for Washington and the world

A few days ago, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, I heard a herd of prominent international figures analyzing the inauguration ceremony of Donald Trump this week. Seriously, and on a grilled salmon dinner, they expressed their concerns about economic, political and geopolitical turmoil. Then one of the world leaders turned into ancient Greek.

“We have a cognitive crisis,” he announced, “We have a cognitive crisis,” referring to the Greek words Knowledge (“Knowledge”) and Slogans (“study”). More specifically, the various social tribes are now explaining knowledge in different ways that it fears “undermining democracy”.

Quite that. Not to mention that Trump’s repellent this week with his deliberate provocative exaggerations that “weave truth, imagination and imagination” together, as Graham Alison, a professor at Harvard University, told me.

The most prominent thing is the results of two recent investigative studies. One, conducted by the World Economic Forum, This shows For the second year in a row, members of the elite delegations (mostly) consider at the meeting that “misinformation” constitutes the largest short -term global threat, before wars and weather disasters. This problem did not even appear in the list of concerns before 2024.

the second reconnaissanceFrom the Edelman Public Relations Group, it appears that 61 percent of people (in 28 countries) feel unjust to governments, companies and the wealthy – and that 40 percent support hostile work to impose change.

Moreover, two -thirds of the participants believe that business leaders, governments and the media are deliberately lying to them, a sharp increase compared to recent years. The fact that Trump attacks elites and experts – including scholars at the university National Institutes of Health – This reflects. As one of Trump’s CEOs said to me after the US President gave a flowing speech to the World Economic Forum: “People are angry.”

How then should the elites and experts respond? Based on the hadiths that took place in Davos, there are two reply. Some business leaders (such as technology workers) simply ignore Trump’s “delusions” about concluding deals. Others (such as angry progressive) and describe it and supporters as being deluded, stupid or bad – and they hope that Trump and/or that the organizers and major technology companies will “correct” lies.

However, I would like to suggest that there is another way: leaders must think about what they can do to help address this cognitive division. how? There are several possible steps. The first is to engage in “”Deep listening“In the words of the concept that the journalist, Emily Cassarer. This means listening to what Trump supporters say with the least number of pre -filters. We need sympathy to understand the reason behind the eruption of public grievances.

We also need this to understand another point: Many Trump supporters believe that they are fighting a battle to save Western civilization – and with the same emotional power that climate activists enjoy, for example. It cannot be rejected or mocking it.

Second, if the leaders want to restore general respect for experience, they must embrace the “error tape”, which is the old scientific principle that requires the researchers to refer honestly to the level of their confidence in the results of research. This was forgotten during the pandemic, when politicians made dogmatic statements on medical issues (vaccines, for example) – sometimes they curbed the debate – even when the science was temporary.

Perhaps this was understood amid a state of panic. But it contributed to stirring the general irony of the “experts”, businessman Peter Thil said I noticed recently In the foot. Therefore, leaders of all political stripes must abide by the future error strip if they are willing to restore their credibility.

Third, leaders must (as I did It is often written before(We admit that vertical confidence – in the personalities and institutions with power – is collapsing today. Instead, people are increasingly dependent on peer groups or communities as sources of advice (in other words, on side confidence relations). Perhaps leaders hate this, but they must Work with him, and he does not wish to disappear.

Fourth, if you believe in the enlightening principle of critical thinking, you must put your money behind it. This means paying the costs of good journalism, supporting intellectual research in research centers and universities, and strengthening this in the process of making policy. For inspiration, see 31447orgA political work committee established by American scientists aimed at appointing more scholars in public positions. I have already mobilized thousands of volunteers. But you can do more.

Fifth, leaders should support initiatives to combat misleading information online. This does not mean the use of hierarchical power to crush freedom of expression. However, it means placing protection barriers against violent activity and supporting societal facts verification platforms. These focusing tools are now the main resort against lies online, as Mita and others decided to cut the content supervision.

These steps are not a magic stick. But it is better than satisfying, despair and blame. The difficult fact is that neither major technology companies nor government are able to solve the cognitive crisis. The responsibility rests with all of us.

Gillian.tett@ft.com