The former Lib Dem leader haltingly points us to the true nature of the human heart
“The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked.” The words of the Old Testament prophet Jeremiah are not what we expect to hear from political figures in 2025 — despite, that is, the abundant evidence in the world around us of the truth of the prophet’s words. In a rather unexpected turn of events, however, recent days have provided an echo of Jeremiah in the form of Sir Nick Clegg.
I am not in the habit of referring in positive terms to Liberal Democrat figures, but the former Deputy PM, and former president of global affairs for the parent company of Facebook, almost sounded like a contemporary Jeremiah when speaking to a conference in Oslo on the issue of “fake news”. Rather than blame algorithms for “fake news” going viral, Sir Nick pointed to the human heart:
“That is partly to do with human nature. This is the awful truth: we like misinformation, we like lurid headlines, we like gossip, we like mischief, we like people saying critical things of each other. It’s deep, deep in human nature … We are not nice. Human beings are not always nice and never ever have been”.
Changing algorithms would not change the human heart. Even then, the words of the prophet Jeremiah would still confront us with the truth of fallen human nature. There was, after all, no internet and no algorithms when, as Simon Schama powerfully narrated in his account of the French Revolution, Marie-Antoinette was the focus of luridly pornographic and misogynistic “phobic hysterias”. Likewise, the chants at Glastonbury of “death, death to the IDF” had little to do with algorithms; this “toxic Jew-hatred”, as the Chief Rabbi rightly described it, came from hearts which embraced an ancient, dark hatred.
The desires of the crowd can be evil; no less is this true of elite desires
What Sir Nick called the “awful truth” is what Christianity terms Original Sin: “deep, deep in human nature”, with primordial roots, is this infection of every heart, inclining us to evil. It is not, of course, that we always act in ways which are evil; it is that, both in times of dramatic crisis and in the ordinary routines, we too often do that which wounds others, scars our conscience, and acts contrary to that which is good for us and our neighbour.
The wisdom of the doctrine of Original Sin should guide us to have a profound scepticism in political and cultural life about inflated claims for populism. Elon Musk is fond of invoking the mantra “Vox Populi, Vox Dei”. Whatever sympathies we might have with populist movements in the context of the profound political, economic, and cultural failures of governing elites, the antidote to a starry-eyed optimism about populism — never mind the absurdity of the “Vox Populi, Vox Dei” claim — is the reality of Original Sin. Crowds can show wisdom; they can also act in profoundly foolish and evil ways. Populism, in other words, needs checks and balances.
Sir Nick almost sounded like a contemporary Jeremiah. The qualification is significant. The Old Testament prophet also addressed the self-satisfied elites of ancient Israel, unmoved by the plight of their poor neighbours and acting in their own economic interests: “Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches”.
Jeremiah reminds us that it is not only the heart of the crowd that is “deceitful above all things”. So too are the hearts of enlightened elites. The desires of the crowd can be evil; no less is this true of elite desires. The “grown-ups” are not at all immune from the reality of Original Sin.
Those who create the algorithms, those inventing and applying AI are not disinterested, dispassionate agents; they are not inherent forces of good. They too are shaped by Original Sin. Pride, hubris, greed, selfishness, the desire to control: such characteristics are “deep, deep” in the nature of those driving technological advances, no less than amongst the crowds using that technology.
Then there are the transhumanist fantasies of Silicon Valley, no less dark — indeed, more so — than the fantasies of Far Right and Hard Left found amongst some of the populists. Employing technology to “end” sickness, aging, and death is but the latest utopian fantasy which seeks to fundamentally change human nature. Like all such utopian radicalism, it is a pathway to authoritarianism and injustice.
A deep scepticism about Big Tech is no less necessary than a scepticism about populism. The business models, technological advances, and cultural ambitions of Silicon Valley are no less subject to Original Sin than are populist surges. The same reality and wisdom which requires checks and balances on crowds, requires checks and balances on technological elites.
“History consists for the greater part of the miseries brought upon the world by pride, ambition, avarice, revenge, lust, sedition, hypocrisy, ungoverned zeal, and all the train of disorderly appetites which shake the public with the same.”
So said Edmund Burke, providing a summary of how Original Sin shapes our common life. It calls for a robust scepticism about ideologies and power, elites and crowds, technology and its users. The claims of each need to be checked, subjected to scrutiny, and balanced by competing and opposing interests, allowing us — with all of the fallibility and uncertainty inherent to being human — to discern what may be good, true, and just in our circumstances.
Thomas Cranmer, the author of the Book of Common Prayer, wrote a “General Confession” for all to use: “Almighty and most merciful Father … We have followed too much the devices and desires of our own hearts”. It is a rather more spiritually compelling, philosophically robust, and poetic account than Sir Nick’s “Human beings are not always nice and never ever have been”. The former Lib Dem leader, however, haltingly points us somewhat in the right direction. Heeding the exhortation of the prophet Jeremiah and making the words of Cranmer our own would be a wise step in a time of populist anger and elite confusion.