Skip to content
Blogcritical thinking
How UFOs and New Religions Capture Young Men
12
Misagh Zad's avatarMisagh Zad

Listen: How UFOs and New Religions Became Tools to Capture the Minds of Young Men

0:000:00

How UFOs and New Religions Became Tools to Capture the Minds of Young Men

Let’s stop pretending this is complicated. Young men are not suddenly obsessed with UFO whistleblowers, secret government files, “new religions,” cultish self-help prophets, or cosmic conspiracy theories because they woke up one morning craving weirdness. This didn’t happen by accident. This is the result of an attention economy that figured out something dangerous: young men are starving for meaning.
And when a generation feels lost, the people who control the digital megaphones don’t give them purpose. They give them content. Preferably the kind that triggers their fear, their hope, their loneliness, their need to feel chosen, their need to feel right.
That’s why UFO testimony hits the algorithm harder than therapy. That’s why modern “religious influencers” outperform real community leaders. That’s why a video telling young men “it’s not your fault, the system is broken” gets a million views while anything about actual emotional work gets ignored.
The elite attention engineers know exactly what they are doing. They sell you the illusion of meaning, not meaning itself.

Let’s break it down.


The Crisis Nobody Wants to Admit

There is a generation of young men sleepwalking through life. Not because they’re weak. Not because they’re lazy. But because they were raised inside systems that promised opportunity and delivered anxiety, promised connection and delivered loneliness, promised freedom and delivered a never-ending psychological treadmill.
But instead of talking about unspoken grief, social disconnection, and collapsing identities, the algorithm gives them spectacle.
Because spectacle keeps people hooked. Healing does not.

  • UFO hearings? Hook.
  • Mystical new gurus? Hook.
  • Apocalyptic predictions? Hook.
  • Podcasters screaming about decline? Hook.

The more anxious young men feel, the easier they are to retain.
And the elite voices who know how to market existential panic have turned it into a business model. Scott Galloway, for example, built an entire empire on telling young men they’re failing because society is broken and they should be angry. Sam Harris built a massive platform on secular spirituality and existential dramatics, feeding the appetite for grand narratives without ever offering grounded solutions.
These men aren’t villains. They’re just playing the game.
But the game itself is the problem.


UFOs: Meaning on Demand

Look at the surge of UFO content over the last three years. Suddenly every algorithm is pushing whistleblowers, Pentagon leaks, alien bodies, secret spacecraft, “non-human biologics,” you name it. It’s everywhere. Why?
Because UFOs offer something irresistible to young men:

  • a story where they finally matter.
  • If aliens exist, then life has a larger purpose.
  • If aliens have visited, then governments are lying.
  • If governments are lying, then you’re one of the few who “knows the truth.”

That feeling is addictive.
That feeling sells.
And it’s much easier than dealing with your actual life.
Who needs therapy when the universe might be hiding a galactic conspiracy?
Who needs community when you can join a subreddit with a thousand people who think like you?
Who needs purpose when you can feel like a chosen observer of the greatest secret in human history?
The attention economy knows this.
And it feeds it deliberately.


New Religions: The Algorithm as a Prophet

Religion used to be a stable institution. Slow. Grounded. Heavy.
Now religious meaning is served like fast food.
Bite-sized spirituality.
Mystical aesthetic edits.
Clip-sized enlightenment.

People like to say young men have become “less religious”.
Wrong. They’ve become hyper-religious.
But their religion is algorithmic.

  • Their gods are podcasts.
  • Their scriptures are viral clips.
  • Their prophets are influencers with ring lights.
  • Their rituals are doomscrolling.
  • Their churches are Discord servers.

Instead of moral teachings, they get “5 signs you’re not the problem, the world is.”
Instead of community, they get a comment section.
Instead of discipline, they get shortcuts to “unlocking your potential.”
Instead of humility, they get the intoxicating sense of being “awake” while everyone else is “asleep.”

This is what the algorithm sells:

  • micro-doses of identity.
  • micro-doses of meaning.
  • micro-doses of belonging.

None of it requires effort.
All of it keeps you scrolling.
And every scroll prints money for someone else.


The Elite Know the Game

Let’s be blunt.
People like Scott Galloway or Sam Harris play this game better than most.
Both of them built massive audiences by tapping into the emotional chaos of young men.
Galloway positions himself as the father figure yelling, “It’s not your fault”, using market data as a moral weapon.
Harris offers existential clarity dressed as rational truth, dripping with enough drama to feel urgent.
These men are extremely smart.
They understand attention.
They understand despair.
They understand the psychological vulnerability of young men better than any government think tank ever has.
But the system around them is the real architect.
The platforms boost the most emotionally charged voices because those voices create engagement.
Not hope.
Not empowerment.
Engagement.
The elite don’t have to manipulate anything.
The algorithm already does it for them.


Why Young Men Are the Target

Young men are easy prey for a simple reason:
They are the demographic with the highest emotional volatility and the lowest support structures.

  • They are more likely to be lonely.
  • More likely to lack mentors.
  • More likely to feel useless.
  • More likely to search for meaning online.
  • More likely to spiral into identity confusion.
  • More likely to consume radicalizing content.

When you combine loneliness with uncertainty and an identity vacuum, you get a perfect storm.
And the platforms know exactly how to harvest it.
So they feed them:

  • UFOs to feel special.
  • New religions to feel guided.
  • Crisis narratives to feel justified.
  • Villains to blame so they don’t question deeper truths.

Every video telling young men “you’re not the problem” gets millions of views not because it’s true but because it reinforces emotional dependence.
If the world is the problem, you don’t have to change anything.
You just have to watch more content.


The Attention Economy Needs Young Men to Stay Confused

This is the darkest part of the whole story:
The system does not benefit from young men healing.
Healing makes you stable.
Stable people are boring to the algorithm.
Boring people don’t click.
A healed young man doesn’t watch 30 UFO videos in a row.
A grounded young man doesn’t follow a self-proclaimed prophet on TikTok.
A confident young man doesn’t need someone shouting “you’re not broken” every day.
If young men became emotionally healthy, half the attention economy would collapse overnight.
So the system keeps them hooked by keeping them uncentered.
It keeps them entertained by keeping them confused.
It keeps them scrolling by keeping them unsure of themselves.
This is not an accident.
It’s a strategy.


Meaning Has Become a Product

It’s easy to believe we’re living in a moment of spiritual awakening or cosmic revelation.
The truth is harsher:
We’re living in a moment of engineered meaning.
UFOs aren’t a movement.
They’re a product.
New religions aren’t a revival.
They’re a business category.
The crisis of young men isn’t a tragedy.
It’s a market.
The attention economy is not evil.
It is efficient.
And efficiency means giving young men the exact emotional content that keeps them most dependent.

  • Fear.
  • Wonder.
  • Anger.
  • Loneliness.
  • Cosmic curiosity.
  • Existential dread.

Everything except real connection.
Everything except real mentorship.
Everything except real community.
Everything except real purpose.


What’s Really at Stake

When young men spend enough time inside these algorithmic worlds, something shifts.
Not quickly.
Quietly.
Their imagination changes.
Their worldview shifts.
Their sense of identity erodes.
Their emotional baseline collapses.
And then they start thinking the world is ending.
They start believing secret forces control everything.
They start thinking their lives are meaningless unless they fight some invisible enemy.
They start confusing content with truth.
This is not entertainment.
This is psychological colonization.
If a generation of young men grows up believing that aliens, cosmic revelations, and new religions are going to save them from a world that feels heavy and directionless, then we’re not dealing with a cultural phase.
We’re dealing with a slow, quiet collapse of meaning.


So Where Do We Go From Here?

Here’s the honest answer:
Young men don’t need more UFO videos.
They don’t need another distorted religion.
They don’t need more doomsday narratives.
They don’t need more gurus.
They need a foundation.
A community.
A challenge that demands real effort.
A mission that’s grounded in reality.
A space where they can talk, be vulnerable, and not feel judged.
The platforms won’t give them that.
There is no profit in grounded masculinity.
There is no profit in genuine meaning.
There is no profit in stable, mentally healthy young men.
But there is power in reclaiming your attention.
And there is liberation in refusing to be emotionally manipulated by systems that want you to feel broken.
Young men don’t need the algorithm to tell them who they are.
They need to become the authors of their own meaning.
Everything else is noise.

Picks for you

The AI Race Is Not a Technology Race

The AI Race Is Not a Technology Race

The AI race is often framed as a competition of intelligence, models, and algorithms, but this essay argues that it is fundamentally an energy allocation problem hidden beneath a narrative of innovation. AI scales not like software but like heavy industry, consuming vast amounts of electricity and triggering political, social, and infrastructural constraints that code alone cannot solve. The real bottlenecks are not technical breakthroughs, but governance issues such as permitting, grid capacity, public consent, and price stability. In this context, energy geopolitics matter less for directly powering servers and more for creating political slack, cushioning public backlash, and making controversial reallocations of power socially tolerable. The true strategic challenge is not building smarter machines, but justifying why machines should receive scarce energy before people, and doing so without eroding trust or legitimacy. If the AI era succeeds, it will be because societies align energy, politics, and meaning through a story people can live inside; if it fails, it will be because that bargain is rejected.

Read more
2026 and the Return of the Whole Mind

2026 and the Return of the Whole Mind

As we move toward 2026, many of us are sensing a quiet imbalance. We think faster, consume more information, and rely heavily on analysis, yet feel less grounded, less certain, and more disconnected from ourselves. This essay argues that the problem is not thinking itself, but thinking in isolation. For decades, logic, efficiency, and control have been rewarded while intuition, emotion, imagination, and embodied knowing were sidelined. AI now exposes this imbalance by outperforming humans in pure analysis, making it clear that competing on cognition alone is a dead end. What remains distinctly human is the ability to sense context, notice subtle signals, integrate feeling with reason, and act with timing rather than urgency. Burnout, anxiety, and chronic overthinking are framed not as weaknesses but as signals of misalignment, where inner intelligence has been ignored too long. The future will favor integrated minds, people who can think clearly while also listening inwardly, adapting without panic, and making meaning from lived experience. The return of the whole mind is not nostalgia or softness, but a necessary evolution: a widening of intelligence that allows humans to partner with technology without losing themselves.

Read more
Why Immigration Feels More Dangerous Than It Statistically Is

Why Immigration Feels More Dangerous Than It Statistically Is

Why Immigration Feels More Dangerous Than It Statistically Is explains how fear can grow even when reality stays relatively stable. Most of what we believe about crime and immigration does not come from direct experience but from repeated images, clips, and headlines designed to capture attention. The human brain uses a shortcut called the availability heuristic, it assumes that what comes to mind easily must be common. In a media environment where rare but extreme incidents are replayed endlessly, exposure replaces frequency, and repetition starts to feel like evidence. Immigration becomes a perfect container for this fear because it is complex, emotional, and easy to turn into a story with faces and villains. Long-term data often shows a calmer picture than our instincts suggest, but fear moves faster than context. The essay argues that critical thinking is not about dismissing fear, but about pausing inside it and asking whether our feelings reflect reality or visibility. When we hold that pause, understanding has room to return, and attention becomes a responsibility rather than a reflex.

Read more
Emotion as Navigation

Emotion as Navigation

Emotion as Navigation argues that emotions are not irrational reactions or inner verdicts, but feedback signals that indicate how our current reality relates to an underlying goal. We do not perceive the world neutrally and then feel about it; perception, emotion, and action form a single system oriented toward movement and adjustment. Positive emotions signal alignment, while negative emotions signal friction, misalignment, or outdated assumptions. Problems arise when we treat emotions as authority instead of information, or when the goals guiding our lives remain unexamined. Critical thinking does not suppress emotion, it interprets it by asking what aim the feeling is responding to and whether that aim still deserves commitment. When emotions are read as data rather than commands, they become a navigational compass rather than a source of confusion. A meaningful life, then, is not emotionally smooth but directionally coherent, guided by alignment rather than by the pursuit or avoidance of feelings themselves.

Read more
Thinking Under Pressure in the Age of AI

Thinking Under Pressure in the Age of AI

Thinking Under Pressure in the Age of AI argues that the real risk of AI is not incorrect answers, but how its speed, clarity, and confidence interact with human cognitive biases. Our minds rely on shortcuts designed for efficiency, and AI amplifies these shortcuts by making information feel complete, authoritative, and easy to trust. Biases shape what we notice, how we judge probability, how we commit to decisions, and how emotion quietly leads reasoning, often without awareness. Critical thinking today does not mean rejecting AI or eliminating bias, but slowing down enough to recognize when judgment is being bent by familiarity, confidence, framing, or emotional ease. As AI accelerates information flow, human responsibility shifts toward interpretation, verification, and self-awareness. When we notice our own thinking habits, AI remains a tool; when we do not, it quietly becomes the driver.

Read more
Good, Bad, and the Direction of Attention

Good, Bad, and the Direction of Attention

Good, Bad, and the Direction of Attention argues that we do not experience the world as inherently good or bad, but as helpful or obstructive relative to an often unexamined aim. Our attention, emotions, and moral judgments are shaped by the direction we are moving in, not by neutral facts. What accelerates our path feels “good,” what slows it feels “bad,” even though neither quality exists on its own. This is why people can react morally in opposite ways to the same event, they are oriented toward different goals. The danger arises when the aim itself remains invisible, because alignment then masquerades as virtue and resistance as evil. Critical thinking begins by asking what aim is generating a reaction, not by defending the reaction itself. When we examine direction before judgment, we regain freedom to question whether speed equals progress, whether friction equals harm, and whether what feels urgent actually leads somewhere meaningful.

Read more
What If We Are Living in a Simulation?

What If We Are Living in a Simulation?

What If We Are Living in a Simulation? treats simulation theory not as sci-fi speculation but as a lens for understanding why the world looks the way it does. Simulations exist to explore unknown outcomes, not to preserve harmony, and when viewed this way, suffering, chaos, and instability stop looking like errors and start looking like data. Human history, with its late arrival, layered complexity, religions, governments, markets, and now AI, resembles a staged experiment where new parameters are introduced to increase unpredictability. Meaning, in this frame, does not disappear, it intensifies. If outcomes are uncertain, then choices matter more, not less. Whether the universe is simulated or not, we already live inside conditions where agency, values, and response shape trajectories. We are not spectators waiting for answers, but variables whose actions feed the system itself. The unfinished nature of reality is not proof of meaninglessness, but evidence that participation is the point, and that how we act under uncertainty is the real test.

Read more

Comments

Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…