Hybrid Tears and the Boundaries of Extremism: Navigating New Conflict Zones of Strategic Communication in an Unknown Technological Terrain

The Age of Hybrid Tears

We live in an era where the boundaries between reality and fiction, human and machine, self and others are dissolving into hybrid forms of existence. This collapse breeds what we may call hybrid tears—emotional responses to a world where contradictions do not merely coexist but thrive upon their paradoxes. These tears are not simply symbols of sorrow; they are signifiers of transformation, of an evolving existential state where we mourn the past, embrace the present, and simultaneously fear the unknowable trajectory of the future.

The technological frontier we traverse is not a mere path but an abyss we are compelled to fill with meaning. But what if meaning itself has become an obsolete currency in the new economy of perception? We find ourselves in a paradoxical landscape where strategic communication is both a tool of connection and a weapon of division, where information is fluid yet rigidly controlled, and where the line between authenticity and performance is almost imperceptible.

Yobazlık and the Disintegration of Boundaries

The concept of yobazlık—a term rooted in dogmatic thinking and ideological entrenchment—emerges as both an artifact of the past and a mechanism of the present. Once confined to religious or cultural orthodoxy, it now transcends its origins, infiltrating digital spaces, political discourse, and even the algorithms that govern our choices.

In a world where personalization has turned into algorithmic imprisonment, the act of questioning becomes an anomaly. Strategic communication, originally designed to inform and persuade, has been weaponized to reinforce the echo chambers of the like-minded. Boundaries—once meant to delineate the self from the other, the internal from the external—have either dissolved into data points or hardened into impenetrable ideological silos. The loss of true dialogue is not merely a cultural phenomenon; it is an ontological crisis.

Be Extra: The Hyperreal Persona as Necessity

In a reality where attention is currency, being ordinary is the equivalent of erasure. To be extra—to exaggerate, to embellish, to perform beyond necessity—is no longer a choice but a survival mechanism. Social platforms do not reward authenticity; they reward spectacle. The more hyperreal, the more successful.

Jean Baudrillard once posited that we have entered a world of simulacra, where representation no longer points to an objective reality but merely to other representations. In this hyperreal terrain, the self is no longer an entity but a construct of performative fragments. Strategic communication must now account for this shift—not merely navigating the terrain of deception and reality but actively engaging with the new rules of perception management.

The New Conflict Areas: Where Truth Becomes War

Strategic communication was once a discipline of persuasion and influence. Now, it has become an arena of combat. The battlefield is not only geopolitical but also cognitive, emotional, and digital. The emergence of AI-generated propaganda, deepfakes, and data-driven psychological manipulation has transformed traditional conflict into something far more insidious: war without a declaration, battles without clear adversaries, weapons without visible destruction.

Truth, in this context, is not an objective reality but a site of perpetual contestation. What was once a medium for understanding has become a labyrinth of controlled narratives. The weaponization of misinformation creates new dilemmas—who controls meaning? Who decides which version of reality prevails? And, most hauntingly, what happens when reality itself becomes obsolete?

Unknown Path: The Fate of Technology

Technology has never been neutral. It shapes us as much as we shape it. But unlike previous eras, where innovation followed relatively linear trajectories, we now face an uncertain, exponential curve of transformation. Artificial intelligence, neuro-enhancements, digital immortality—these are not distant science fiction fantasies but immediate dilemmas of human identity.

Does the unknown path that technology carves lead to liberation or control? Do we become gods or ghosts within our systems? The hybrid tears we shed today are not merely a lamentation of the past but a recognition of an unstable, liquid reality—a world where strategic communication is no longer about relaying messages but about constructing and deconstructing the very fabric of experience itself.

Conclusion: A New Ethics of Perception

If we are to navigate this fractured terrain, we must develop new strategies—not just of communication but of perception itself. We must cultivate an ethics that does not retreat into rigid dogma (yobazlık) nor surrender to the demands of the hyperreal (be extra). Instead, we must embrace the paradox of strategic ambiguity—a willingness to exist within the contradictions, to engage without certainty, to communicate without finality.

To cry hybrid tears is to acknowledge that the boundaries of meaning have shifted. It is to recognize that new conflict areas demand new sensibilities. It is to accept that the unknown path is not merely ahead of us but already beneath our feet. And perhaps, in these tears, we do not find despair but the birth of a new mode of existence—a reality still in the process of being written.