Trump vs. Zuckerberg: Who Has Contributed More to Fake News? | Bernard-Henri Lévy| Big Think

Anti-intellectualism means two things: hate of debate and hate of truth as a goal, which can be achieved approximately in a long intellectual process. This is what is hated by anti-intellectualism. The two things together. The debate, the discussion, the opposition of points of view with the consideration of a remote truth. This is the couple. Debate now, truth tomorrow.

And this couple is what the anti-intellectualism of today hates most. So you have people today who defend fanatically some fake news instead of, before, you had people fighting democratically for a remote truth. Again, we change completely the compass, which ends completely the pattern and we are changing the world. And for me, this anti-intellectualism is something which has been coming for a long time and it really paved the road in Europe and in America for neo-populism.

And Trump is not the author of that; he's the result of that. He's the result of this long anti-intellectualism. And in that, the social networks have, as you know, a big responsibility. When Mark Zuckerberg is addressed on that, when he's questioned on that, when he says, "I'm not a historian, I'm not here to make the police of the fake," it's a joke and it's not correct. He does not take the huge responsibility which life gave him.

Without being a historian, Facebook has, Twitter has a huge responsibility in not putting the fake and the news at the same level. Today, if you are 20 years old, if you take your information in this little box, there is very little that can allow you to make the difference between the fake and the news, between the truth and lies. Very little helping to make the difference. No subtitles. Fakes should be subtitled; like in bad movies, you need subtitles.