We live in a 'dunkocracy'

How Social Media Point-Scoring Is Reshaping Global Politics

In today's hyperconnected world, we find ourselves in the age of what might be called a "dunkocracy" – a political environment where scoring points against opponents on social media ("dunking") has become a central feature of political discourse and international relations. This phenomenon is increasingly shaping major geopolitical decisions, economic policies, and international conflicts, often at the expense of thoughtful deliberation and long-term strategy. Research is mounting that this social media-driven political environment poses significant threats to democratic institutions and global stability.

The Mechanics of Digital Dunking

The term "dunkocracy" describes our current political climate where the ability to publicly mock, criticize, or "own" political opponents online is rewarded with viral attention and support. Research confirms this is not just anecdotal observation but a measurable phenomenon.

A Cambridge University study examining nearly three million social media posts from U.S. politicians found that posts criticizing political opponents received twice as many shares as posts promoting their own partisan views^2. The study revealed that political posts containing negative messages about opposing parties garnered twice as many angry face emojis than heart emojis received on positive posts about one's own party^2.

"Slamming the political opposition was the most powerful predictor of a post going viral out of all those we measured," said Steve Rathje, author of the Cambridge study^2. Even more specifically, each additional word about an opposing party in a social media post increased the odds of that post being shared by 67%^7.

This creates a perverse incentive structure where politicians and leaders are rewarded not for substantive policy discussions but for their ability to publicly criticize opponents. As Rathje notes, social media business models have "ended up rewarding politicians and media companies for producing divisive content in which they dunk on perceived enemies"^2.

The Algorithm Reward System

The mechanics behind this phenomenon are deeply intertwined with how social media platforms operate. These platforms are designed to maximize user engagement, which algorithms have determined is highest when content triggers emotional responses – particularly negative ones.

A University of Michigan study found that exposure to political attacks on social media contributes to anxiety, anger, and political cynicism^1. The researchers define political cynicism as an attitude rooted in distrust of political actors' motivations that goes further than healthy skepticism because it involves wholesale rejection of democratic processes^1.

Political Consequences: Domestic Politics in the Age of Dunkocracy

The dunkocracy has fundamentally altered how political movements function. Traditional policy platforms have in some cases been abandoned in favor of performative opposition. Since its inception, Trumpism has made a point of eschewing policy in favor of "owning the libs" to garner likes, retweets, and small-dollar donations^6. During the 2020 election, the Republican Party even chose not to write a new platform for its convention – a telling sign that policy substance had become secondary to performative opposition^6.

The Texas GOP's official Twitter account demonstrated this approach by posting a meme mocking New Yorkers waiting in line for COVID tests, suggesting that if they could wait for testing, they could vote in person^6. This post wasn't designed to advance policy but to provoke outrage from political opponents and approval from supporters.

From Policy to Performance

Political scientist Ariel Hasell and colleagues at the University of Michigan documented how this environment contributes to political cynicism: "It's important to understand how feelings of cynicism emerge because we're seeing many democratic governments facing crises of legitimacy," Hasell said. "Our findings provide some of the first evidence of how exposure to political attacks on social media might relate to political cynicism in the context of a U.S. presidential election."^1

This cynicism has real consequences for democratic governance, as citizens increasingly view politicians not as public servants but as self-interested performers in an endless social media spectacle.

International Relations in the Dunkocracy

Perhaps most concerning is how the dunkocracy phenomenon is reshaping international relations, where the stakes can include war and peace.

Case Study: Trump's Tariff Policies

A recent example is former President Trump's approach to tariffs. In April 2025, Trump imposed sweeping tariffs, including a 10% universal tariff on all imports with higher rates for "worst offenders"^8. This triggered a massive market reaction, with Wall Street experiencing its largest single-day decline since the COVID-19 pandemic, wiping approximately $3.1 trillion from the market^8.

Rather than addressing legitimate economic concerns, Trump took to social media to mock critics, coining the derogatory term "Panican" for those worried about the tariffs' economic impact. "Don't be Weak! Don't be Stupid! Don't be a PANICAN," he wrote^8.

Days later, Trump unexpectedly announced a 90-day suspension on certain tariffs^13. This abrupt reversal prompted social media mockery, with Senator Brian Schatz satirically posting: "OUR PLAN IS WORKING PERFECTLY AND IS JUST A NEGOTIATING TACTIC BUT IT IS ALSO GOING TO BE PERMANENT"^13. The incident highlighted how policy was being driven by social media reaction rather than economic strategy.

Case Study: India-Pakistan Tensions

The India-Pakistan relationship demonstrates how social media "dunking" can escalate international tensions to dangerous levels. Following the February 2019 Pulwama attack in which 40 Indian paramilitary personnel were killed, social media platforms were flooded with inflammatory content^10.

A review of viral social media posts showed that many photos of deceased personnel were doctored and mislabeled, with mainstream Indian channels amplifying these misleading images^10. The Central Reserve Police Force was forced to establish a 12-member fact-checking team which debunked at least 20 false stories^10. The social media frenzy created domestic pressure for military retaliation against Pakistan.

This led to military action when Indian planes violated Pakistani airspace in Balakot. The subsequent exchange of fire and Pakistan's downing of an Indian fighter jet brought the nuclear-armed neighbors close to all-out war^10. Experts have implied that both countries came close to war because of the unprecedented proliferation of fake news driven by social media^10.

Twitter Diplomacy: A Double-Edged Sword

The rise of what has been termed "Twitter diplomacy" represents both opportunities and dangers. Research identifies three advantages of Twitter diplomacy: increased accessibility to audiences, message control, and accelerated network effects^18. However, these benefits come with significant risks.

Relationships between nations become "more fragile and 'undiplomatic'" when leaders bypass traditional diplomatic channels. Even slight misinterpretations on social media can escalate tensions quickly^18. Additionally, leaders risk exposing their personal opinions and emotions, providing adversaries insights into their psychological vulnerabilities^18.

The Canadian-Saudi diplomatic crisis of 2018 illustrates these risks. When Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland criticized Saudi Arabia for arresting activists in a tweet, the Saudi government retaliated by expelling Canada's ambassador and suspending student exchange programs and flights^18. What began as a frustrated tweet created a deep diplomatic rift.

Economic Impacts of the Dunkocracy

Financial markets are increasingly responsive to social media pronouncements, creating economic volatility driven by online posturing rather than economic fundamentals.

The cryptocurrency market provides a clear example. When Elon Musk tweeted that he was "willing to serve" D.O.G.E. (a playful reference to Dogecoin) in August 2024, the cryptocurrency's value surged 3.56%^9. This single tweet, seen by 52 million people, moved a market with a capitalization exceeding $15.3 billion^9.

Musk has faced legal challenges from Dogecoin investors who accuse him of "transparent cryptocurrency market manipulation"^9. While his attorneys describe his tweets as "innocent and often humorous," the real-world economic consequences demonstrate how social media "dunking" can have financial ramifications far beyond their digital origins^9.

Threats to Democracy

The dunkocracy phenomenon poses several distinct threats to democratic institutions and processes.

Undermining Expert Input and Deliberative Processes

Twitter diplomacy allows leaders to declare policies without consulting experts or following traditional processes. In December 2018, President Trump announced the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Syria via Twitter, against the advice of his Defense Secretary^18. This bypassing of established policy channels forces government agencies to frantically adapt to policies announced on social media without proper review^18.

Increasing Polarization and Institutional Distrust

Research confirms that digital media contribute to declining trust in democratic institutions^3. The replication study by the Institute for Replication analyzed studies through March 2024 and confirmed that while digital media promote political participation, they also increase polarization and mistrust in institutions^3.

The Quality Problem in Democratic Participation

While social media platforms remove barriers to political participation, the quality of that participation is often problematic. The absence of editorial or regulatory control means billions of people can "propagate, and therefore legitimise, misleading and destructive rhetoric without challenge"^19.

Even when enhanced participation occurs, research shows that democratic discourse on social media is controlled by a minority of users, undermining the representational benefits^19. The algorithms of platforms like Facebook and Twitter reward divisive content, creating what researchers call a "dangerous political climate"^2.

Can Democracy Survive the Dunkocracy?

The challenges posed by the dunkocracy are significant but not insurmountable. Several potential interventions could help preserve democratic deliberation in the age of social media.

Platform Design Changes

Social media companies could modify their algorithms to reduce rewards for divisive content. As Professor Sander van der Linde from Cambridge University noted, "Unless social media companies start penalising polarising content ... these platforms will continue to be swamped by political animosity"^2.

Some platforms have begun taking steps in this direction. In 2019, Twitter announced it would stop all political advertising, while Facebook introduced an option for users to switch off political advertisements in 2020^2. However, these measures don't address the underlying algorithmic preference for divisive content.

Media Literacy and Critical Thinking

Educating citizens to be more discerning consumers of social media content is crucial. The ability to identify misleading information and understand the emotional manipulation techniques used in social media "dunking" could help reduce its effectiveness.

Institutional Adaptations

Democratic institutions must adapt to preserve deliberative processes in the social media age. This might include creating more transparent policy development processes, establishing clearer communication channels between government agencies and the public, and finding ways to incorporate public input without being driven by the most viral voices.

Conclusion

The "dunkocracy" represents a fundamental challenge to how democracies function in the digital age. When political discourse is reduced to scoring points against opponents, the essential elements of democratic deliberation-reasoned debate, expert input, and compromise-are undermined.

The evidence shows that social media platforms, through their design and business models, have created an environment where divisive, attacking content thrives. This has implications not just for domestic politics but for international relations and economic stability.

As we navigate this new landscape, citizens, leaders, and platform designers all have roles to play in preserving democratic values while embracing the participatory potential of digital media. The challenge is to harness the democratizing power of social media without succumbing to the destructive dynamics of the dunkocracy-a challenge that may define democracy's fate in the 21st century.