The Red Flag Act of the Mind
The Empty Promise of a Risk-Free Life
When you attempt to catch your breath at the end of a demanding day, do you not feel an inexplicable sense of absence, or perhaps a desolate emptiness spreading through the depths of your chest? Looking back upon the day, surely you have fulfilled numerous tasks and duties, exchanged words with others, and enjoyed your meals. Yet, remaining at the bottom of your heart is a coarse sensation, like chewing on dry sand—a sediment of the spirit. It is a quiet, yet sharp suspicion asking: “Did I truly live this day?”
The true nature of the suffering we all hold equally now may stem from a side effect of seeking efficiency too greedily: we have come to perceive the time known as “life” merely as a series of obstacles to be processed, a succession of tasks. Living in the modern age, from the moment we awake, we must constantly respond to an avalanche of notifications and information, or the unexpected troubles caused by the unreasonable behavior of others. We deal with them as if flicking away defective products flowing down a conveyor belt. We believe that if only this obstacle were gone, if only this trouble were resolved, a time for the peaceful, intellectual, “authentic self” would be waiting beyond it. Believing this, we view the immediate the real as an obstruction and become desperate to eliminate it. But that is not what it means to believe. True human belief is not such a thing.
To begin with, what if that peace supposed to be waiting beyond essentially exists nowhere? That is to say, there is no promised peace in life.
Life is such that the older one gets, the more the small, previously unthinkable frays turn into great fissures, descending upon us all at once. Though the timing and degree may vary, this happens to everyone; it is a phenomenon that appears inevitably as a result of daily accumulation. In other words, the mindset of modern people—who define such risks as obstacles, attempt to process them thoroughly in advance, and scheme to improve the future through those days—may be correct as a form of social risk management. However, in this world where the unpredictable occurs with composure, such a mindset is far too brittle.
Moreover, in actuality, most people, without even the time to make such preparations, have their hearts shaken by events, are swallowed by a great muddy torrent, and lose sight of themselves. This “losing sight of oneself” is synonymous with losing life itself, and is the risk we should truly fear.
The quiet question harbored by many—”Have I ever, even once, lived my own life?”—is correct as a standpoint. However, there is a fatal fissure here as well. It is the perspective that the very structure of opposition between the “Ideal Me” and the “Other” (others, society, the world, objects, phenomena) that hinders it is the cause of the anguish. In short, I would like you to ask once more whether the problem truly lies within the “Other.”
When we are irritated by troubles at work or friction in human relationships, we inevitably think, “If only this trouble didn’t exist, I could have remained calm and intellectual.” However, the moment we actually face such events, almost all people find their hearts tossed about, unable to avoid becoming emotional. Or when wounded by someone’s heartless words, to think “If only these words didn’t exist, I could have been happy” is the same. Furthermore, in the modern age, if we include the online space, we are made to carry this anxiety for twenty-four hours a day. Therefore, we cannot truly relax, nor can we even earnestly contemplate life.
Above all, no matter how much one loves peace and is thoroughly committed to living at one’s own pace in silence, these ripples are thrown into one’s daily life from the outside with indifference.
As a fundamental premise, it is impossible to maintain a state where such ripples do not occur throughout a life, or a world where unstable risks are excluded. Rather, the world is not made that way; more precisely, the real is not such an overprotected clean room. To begin with, in the present where the collapse of reality—which has alienated us from the real—is obvious to everyone’s eyes as the collapse of modernity, to continue painting over this without discerning this viewpoint is the most grotesque aspect of humanity deferring problems to the future. For those with a heart who truly think of the future, this is an unavoidable issue.
And the event that symbolizes that actions fundamentally misinterpreting this the real still occur on a national scale is the enforcement of the law in Australia on December 10, completely prohibiting social media use for those under sixteen.
Since the pandemic, the explosive increase in mental problems among the youth has garnered global attention, and the primary cause has been discussed, without exception, in connection with social media dependence. Indeed, all of us know that, at the very least, excessive use of social media is not good for one’s mental state.
In fact, I myself possess no accounts for what is generally called social media—Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Youtube, X, Reddit, Snapchat, and the like—nor do I view them. Furthermore, speaking strictly of Japan, I do not look at Yahoo! at all, which remains the central pillar of news sources and operates a massive business in Japan despite being banned globally for serious defects in privacy protection, nor do I use LINE, through which almost all Japanese people exchange messages.
Therefore, I agree that the excessive use of social media causes immense problems for human mental health. However, that is not necessarily limited by age, such as being under sixteen; it is the same for any generation. Also, while it is conceivable that bans on social media usage capped at a certain age will spread globally hereafter, one problem remains: while everyone admits it causes issues for the mental health of the youth, where exactly lies the overprotective intention of the state to intervene legally—even regarding the presence or absence of people using social media?
Of course, since it receives the approval of the majority of the citizenry, it is likely for the protection of children’s mental health, as Australian Prime Minister Albanese states. That is a certain fact, yet on the other hand, a total ban appears only as excessive state intervention.
There is no mistake that social media dependence destroys our spirits. That is a fact seemingly acknowledged by all. Even for influencers who have earned their living through social media, it would be difficult to deny this problem. But, accepting that as one facet of the truth, let us change our way of thinking here.