Mimesis

Mimesis, originally rooted in classical philosophy and later expanded by scholars like René Girard, refers to the process by which desires, behaviours, identities, and even values are imitated, replicated, and transmitted from one individual or group to another, essentially framing human interaction as an endless cycle of mimicry that plays a central role in shaping our social reality[1].

This imitative mechanism is not merely about copying superficial behaviours but entails a deep, often subconscious, emulation of what is perceived as desirable or valuable within a cultural context, resulting in a dynamic process where individuals’ aspirations and actions are formed in relation to the observed desires of others[2].

In today’s digital age, social media platforms have become the quintessential arenas for mimesis, as these platforms are designed to facilitate the rapid dissemination of content, ideas, and behaviours across vast networks, thereby allowing for the immediate and widespread replication of cultural signals[3].

The inherent architecture of social media—characterised by user profiles, likes, shares, comments, and algorithmically curated feeds—creates an environment where homogenisation is both encouraged and inevitable, amplifying mimetic desire by constantly exposing users to a curated stream of behaviours, lifestyles, and opinions that serve as models for what to emulate[4].

This phenomenon is not only limited to trivial trends but extends to political narratives, social movements, and even conflict dynamics, where the rapid replication of certain images, slogans, and ideologies can lead to large-scale shifts in public opinion and drive collective action in both constructive and destructive ways[5].

Social media’s design, with its notifications, incentives for engagement, and visual uniformity, inherently pushes users towards a “crisis of sameness” in which the boundaries between individual identity and collective identity blur, resulting in a scenario where mimetic rivalry intensifies as individuals and groups compete to distinguish themselves from the ubiquitous models while simultaneously striving to be part of them[6].

This competition often goes hand in hand with the commodification of personal identity, as platforms reduce users to profiles that mirror one another, making every post, reaction, or share a reiteration of underlying cultural desires that are shaped by the collective aesthetic and behavioural norms established online[7].

In this digital landscape, mimesis is transmitted through various mechanisms, such as the replication of memes, viral challenges, and even political propaganda, where the replication of images, narratives, and sentiments creates a self-perpetuating cycle that reinforces existing power structures and sometimes subverts them by opening avenues for counter-narratives[8].

This digital replication process is not a passive one; rather it is deeply intertwined with psychological responses like dopamine release, where the instant gratification derived from likes, shares, and positive feedback loops encourages users to continuously mimic behaviours that have been validated by their peers, thereby reinforcing a cycle of imitative behaviour that can lead to both conformity and innovation in unexpected ways[9].

Moreover, social media’s role in mimesis goes beyond individual behaviour to encompass the strategic construction of narratives, as seen in instances where state actors and interest groups deploy mimetic techniques to shape public perception, control political discourse, and even wage information warfare, leveraging the networked nature of these platforms to disseminate disinformation and manipulate social cognition on a massive scale[10].

This facet of mimesis has been observed in various contexts, including electoral politics where digital propaganda is refined to target specific demographics, and in conflict zones where mimetic replication of certain images or messages serves as a psychological weapon designed to undermine the morale of opponents or to galvanise support among sympathisers[11].

The phenomenon is further deepened by the interaction between micro-communities and the broader digital ecosystem, as users increasingly migrate from mainstream media to niche platforms and micro-communities where shared beliefs and values are amplified, often resulting in an echo chamber effect that reinforces mimetic desires and can lead to radical shifts in cultural and political landscapes[12].

In these spaces, mimesis acts as both a unifying and divisive force, uniting individuals around common ideals while simultaneously fostering a competitive environment where every behaviour, style, or political stance is scrutinised against a backdrop of incessant social comparison, driving a continual process of imitation that can either stabilise social orders or contribute to their destabilisation in times of rapid cultural or technological change[13].

A crucial aspect of how mimesis is transmitted via social media is the role of technological design itself; the platforms are intentionally created to encourage a replicable and imitative structure, where the user sign-up process, default page designs, and the editing features all contribute to an ecosystem in which the replication of behaviour is not accidental but built into the very code of digital interactions, reinforcing patterns of behaviour that are easily mimicked and shared across diverse user groups[14].

This embedded nature of mimesis in digital interfaces not only exacerbates what some scholars refer to as “the narcissism of small differences”—where minor distinctions between individuals become magnified in the quest for uniqueness—but also underscores the paradox of modern social media, a space that is at once a platform for individual expression and a medium that promotes uniformity through imitative behaviour[15].

As a result, the transmission of mimetic phenomena on social media creates a dual-edged scenario where the benefits of rapid communication and the viral spread of innovative ideas are counterbalanced by the risks of oversimplified narratives, cultural homogenisation, and the escalation of digital conflicts driven by the automatic replication of divisive content[16].

The concept of mimesis, therefore, becomes essential in understanding not just the mechanics of social media but also its broader societal impacts, as it illustrates how digital technologies have transformed traditional modes of communication into complex systems where identity, desire, and power are continuously negotiated through cycles of imitation and replication[17].

Ultimately, mimesis in the context of social media underscores a fundamental reordering of human communication, one that is marked both by the democratisation of information and by the manipulation of social consciousness, where every like, share, and viral meme is a testament to the perpetual and often subconscious exchange of desires that binds modern societies together in ways that are both revolutionary and fraught with unintended consequences, thereby revealing that what might at first glance appear as trivial online behaviours are in fact manifestations of deep-seated psychological and sociological processes that have significant implications for how we perceive ourselves, interact with one another, and ultimately construct our social realities in a world that is increasingly mediated by technology[18].

References:
[1] Girard, R. (1977). Violence and the Sacred
[2] Tarde, G. (1903). The Laws of Imitation
[3] Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence Culture
[4] Boyd, D. (2014). It’s Complicated
[5] Baudrillard, J. (1994). Simulacra and Simulation
[6] Girard, R. (1996). The Girard Reader
[7] van Dijck, J. (2013). The Culture of Connectivity
[8] Shifman, L. (2014). Memes in Digital Culture
[9] Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism
[10] Castells, M. (2009). Communication Power
[11] Singer, P.W. & Brooking, E.T. (2018). LikeWar
[12] Pariser, E. (2011). The Filter Bubble
[13] Turkle, S. (2011). Alone Together
[14] Norman, D. (2013). The Design of Everyday Things
[15] Freud, S. (1930). Civilization and Its Discontents
[16] Lovink, G. (2019). Sad by Design
[17] McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding Media
[18] Debord, G. (1967). The Society of the Spectacle