Mediatization, polarization, and intolerance (between environments, media, and circulation)

Mediatization and virtuality in human sciences: An announced crossroads 55 of personal improvement. From this context, therefore, comes the sharp dissociation between knowledge production and so- cial form, in which the retraction of the virtuality of time, as a substrate for the intelligibility of contemporary knowledge, con- stitutes one of its most significant practical results. 3. Social media and modernization The social modernization we are talking about is not ex- actly recent. Strictly speaking, the bases of the “conservative and neoliberal shift [as] a political response to the economic and so- cial crisis of the Fordist regime of capital accumulation” (DARDOT; LAVAL, 2016, p. 189), identified in the 1970s-1980s, with Marga - ret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan’s governments, can be found in historical situations that precede it. It is the case, for example, of the Walter Lippmann Colloquium, in Paris, 1938, in presentations by Louis Rougier, member of the Vienna Circle and organizer of the meeting, or by Lippmann himself, honored by the seminar, who advocate both a broad educational process, which adapts in- dividuals to the inevitable market economy, as a State capable of “purifying the competitive market through a carefully adjusted legal framework” (ibid., p. 69). Likewise, such ideals can be ob- served in the principles pleaded by German ordoliberalism, espe- cially those with a sociological impulse, like that of Walter Eucken and Wilhelm Röpke, who defended the duties and obligations of individuals as a condition of a decentralized state, in which one must have taken into account the growing individual account- ability as a basis for the principle of subsidiarity between local, regional, and national spheres (ibid., 2016). And finally, as one of the most striking marks of the current neoliberal format, one can mention the Austro-American thought of Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek, who undertake the communicational bias of knowledge as a decisive factor for the market economy. For the authors, the “market economy is an information economy,” the central issue being “knowing how individuals will be able to make the best use of the fragmentary information they have” (ibid., p. 144). According to them, each individual would have a range of incomplete and structurally disperse knowledge. However, in a