Why do algorithmic news feeds make every political issue feel urgent and extreme?

Because urgency is profitable, and extremity generates engagement. Algorithms aren't neutral—they're optimized for time spent, shares, and emotional intensity. Nuance doesn't survive in that ecosystem. A measured take on tax policy gets buried. A rage-inducing headline about the same policy travels. Laozi described the Tao as paradoxical: moving without moving, the uncarved block containing infinite possibility. Our algorithmic feeds are the opposite—carved relentlessly toward one direction: intensity. What's happening in your nervous system matters here. When you're fed a stream of extreme political content, your threat-detection system activates. Cortisol rises. You feel like everything is on fire. But the fire is curated. The algorithm isn't showing you the quiet work of governance, the slow victories, the complexity where most real politics actually happens. Here's what I practice: I check political news once daily, deliberately, from sources without algorithmic feeds. I read deeply rather than broadly. And I ask: *Why am I feeling this urgency right now?* Often the answer is structural—the feed is designed to make me feel it. Your political judgment improves when you remove the artificial pressure to decide everything immediately. Slow your consumption. Notice the difference in your thinking.