Structured Anonymity and Perception Engineering in Digital Polarization in East Flores

Structured Anonymity and Perception Engineering in Digital Polarization in East Flores

(For Silent Readers in Social Media groups)

The battle of opinions between supporters of the Regent of East Flores and opponents on social media no longer moves within the corridor of rational policy criticism. It turns into an emotional contestation. It is filled with diction that worships without measurement and attacks without data. The complexity of governance is condensed into a slogan.

Criticism is reduced to sentiment. Support polished into absolute loyalty. This is a pattern of demagogy that was long ago mapped out by Aristotle as rhetoric that provokes mass emotions when rational arguments are considered to hinder the mobilization of support.

Demagogy works by simplifying complex public problems. The budget is separated from the priority context. Policies are separated from performance indicators. Criticism is positioned as a threat. Supporters are projected as moral guardians. In a situation like this, democracy is no longer a space for deliberation.

It has become a stage for agitation. Public rationality is being eroded little by little.

This symptom becomes more serious when the fight takes place mostly through the “Anonymous Participant” feature on the Facebook group “Latest Flotim News”.

This feature is not a wild space without control. It is activated through admin authority. This is a discussion room management decision.
It’s not neutral. In Jürgen Habermas’s public sphere theory, discourse legitimacy arises from openness of identity and equality of participation.

When identities are systemically obscured, transparency weakens and power relations become asymmetrical.

Anonymous participants may feel comfortable and protected. They feel they can speak without social pressure. However, at that point a clear indicator emerged. An anonymous identity is not without a trace.
This identity is known to the group admin. Anonymity is selective and centralized. The public doesn’t know who is talking. Admin knows.

The consequences are not vague. Rational conjecture can be directed at the possibility that anonymity is consciously maintained. It is even possible that it could be used to simplify public divisions and accumulate irrational opinions among Flotim residents.

If anonymity proliferates in polarizing posts and comments, it has the potential to become an instrument of perception production. It can create the illusion of massive support. It can amplify the reverberations of personal attacks. It can suppress rational voices that prefer open identities.

This phenomenon is in line with the spiral of silence formulated by Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann. Opinions that appear dominant can make other parties hesitate to speak out. This dominance could be established by an identity that is controlled administratively.

According to constitutional law, freedom of expression is a constitutional right. This right is inherent in the responsible legal subject. Democracy requires moral courage to take responsibility for one’s speech in the public sphere.

When structured anonymity is maintained in local political battles, accountability weakens. Criticism loses ethical weight. Support loss of honesty. Discourse loses integrity.

The motive for using the Anonymous Participant feature can be read in several layers. There is a self-protection motive in communities with close relationships. There is a motive for aggression without reputation risk. There is a motif of orchestration of perception before the narrative is officially legitimized. But if that anonymity is known and managed by a single administrative authority, the question becomes more fundamental.

So what?

If the loudest are faceless accounts whose identities are known only to one hand, is that still freedom or just orchestration?

If named citizens choose silence because they are tired of anonymous echoes, is that participation or subtle silencing? If anonymity is maintained and polarization is simplified, are we nurturing democracy or creating the illusion of it?

By Kico Lamanepa