Algorithms of Division

In crisis-ridden societies, bias ceases to be merely a fleeting opinion or temporary emotion; it gradually transforms into a political and social tool that reshapes public consciousness, producing new maps of enmity, hatred, and alignment. This is particularly evident today in the Palestinian case, where bias is no longer limited to differing political programs or orientations; it has expanded into the very social fabric, to the extent that a Palestinian is sometimes redefined according to their organizational, geographical, family affiliation, or even their stance on a transient political event.

Historically, Palestinians have experienced various forms of natural bias, linked to the formation of a collective identity in the face of occupation and colonialism. It was natural for the narrative of "us" to be reinforced in opposition to the Israeli "other," and for national memory to be built upon glorifying resilience, sacrifice, and the collective Palestinian identity. This type of bias was a national necessity to protect society from dissolution and posed no danger as long as it was directed towards enhancing national unity.

However, what we witness today is entirely different. We face a dangerous transition from "natural bias" to "manufactured bias," which is deliberately produced through local media, social media platforms, and political interest groups, aiming to shape a biased consciousness that serves one party against another or to restructure popular sentiment in line with calculations of influence and representation.

In the recent local elections, for example, competition was not confined to programs, services, and administrative abilities; it often morphed into psychological and social mobilization campaigns against competing lists. The language of betrayal, exclusion, and political and familial bullying emerged prominently, with some local pages entrenching the idea that the victory of one side means the "fall of the community" or the "loss of the city" or the "betrayal of history." Here, the media has ceased to be a mere transmitter of events; it has become part of the machinery for manufacturing division.

What is more alarming is that social media has granted this bias immense capacity for spread and influence. The algorithms of these platforms do not reward rationality; they reward sensationalism, anger, and emotion. Consequently, the most incendiary content becomes the most widely circulated, while the calm and rational voice fades away. Over time, closed social bubbles form, in which each side only hears its echo, convincing itself that its opponent is not only politically different but also an ethical and national enemy.

This scene is repeating itself today with heightened sensitivity regarding discussions related to the eighth conference of the Fatah movement. Observers of the Palestinian digital space note the degree of polarization that transcends the boundaries of natural organizational differences, turning into a sharp sorting process between "original Fatah" and "true Fatah" and "the legitimate current" and "the deviant current," as if the movement that has been the backbone of Palestinian national identity for decades is now threatened with fragmentation through an internal discourse nourished by manufactured bias more than anything else.

The problem is not in the existence of differences within the movement or within the Palestinian community; differences can sometimes be natural and healthy. The danger lies in the entities that exploit these differences, exaggerate them, and reproduce them daily through media and digital platforms. Some pages and accounts do not operate as media tools but rather as psychological operations rooms aimed at mobilizing supporters, stirring fears, and weakening opponents. This type of manufactured bias is the most dangerous, as it not only describes reality but creates a new reality based on suspicion, hatred, and social rupture.

Even more dangerously for Palestinians is that society is already living under immense pressure: occupation, ongoing war on Gaza, economic collapse, declining trust in institutions, and prolonged political deadlock. In such environments, people become more susceptible to believing inflammatory discourses, as the weary person always seeks a quick explanation for their crises or an "internal adversary" to hold responsible for collective failures.

This is why many of the prevailing biases today do not stem from deep intellectual conviction but rather from a state of general psychological and social exhaustion. A citizen besieged by fear, poverty, and anxiety becomes more prepared to be dragged behind a discourse of hatred or betrayal or exclusion, especially when this discourse is presented to them in a national, moral, or revolutionary framework.
The real dilemma is that the persistence of this atmosphere will gradually lead to the disintegration of what remains of Palestinian social bonds. A society where political disagreement turns into social hatred loses its ability to build a comprehensive national project.

History teaches us that societies do not fall only due to external occupations but sometimes due to carefully manufactured divisions within them.

Therefore, the coming Palestinian struggle is not only political but also a struggle for consciousness. A battle against transforming media into a platform for internal mobilization, against reducing nationalism to loyalty to this party or that, and against turning social media into arenas for daily moral assassination of Palestinians against each other.

Not all bias is dangerous, but the most dangerous type of bias is that which is manufactured consciously, fueled by fear, and marketed as a defense of the homeland, while in reality, it drains society from within and transforms the Palestinian from a partner in the cause into an adversary in the same arena.