Praying to St Jude: counselling the re-Googlers

I’m well into my third year of being completely Google-free. I no longer use any Google products or services, for reasons I explained in an earlier article on why I de-Googled. For the most part, I’m happy with my decision, despite the difficulties.

I don’t make a habit of preaching to other people about why Google is bad and should be avoided. Still, when people ask why I eschew Google – and they do – I try to explain. I’m pleased to say I’ve encouraged a few other people to cut ties with Google, and I’ve been able to offer at least a little support to folks in the early days of Google-free living.

So, as you might imagine, I was a little dismayed to learn that some people who de-Googled in the last year or two have given up, and allowed Google back into their lives. For me, this is like hearing that a recovering alcoholic has fallen off the wagon, or that a vegan has started chasing livestock around the farm with a knife and fork.

I hear two main reasons for this back-sliding, or “re-Googling”, as we might call it.

The first, of course, is that avoiding Google can be very inconvenient. Some people don’t even realize how difficult it will be, until they’ve been Google-free for some months. We mostly don’t appreciate how much we’ve come to rely on Google services, until we make a real effort to stop using them.

This argument – that it’s difficult and inconvenient to avoid Google – is one I understand and, to some extent, I can counter it. There are ways to mitigate the difficulties of living Google-free if you have sufficient motivation. I can advise of alternatives to most Google products and services and, while they aren’t usually free-of-charge, they’re often superior to what Google offers in return for destroying your privacy. You’ll certainly have to do some things differently, particularly if you have friends and family who are still in thrall to Google – and most of us do. Still, almost everybody can live without Google if they really want to, albeit with some adjustments to their routines.

But cost and inconvenience aren’t the only reasons people give for re-Googling. Another is that my de-Googling doesn’t hurt Google. Many people who make the move away from Google expect others to follow their example so that, in the end, Google will fall and all will be well with the world. I can’t deny that I felt a little that way myself when I first de-Googled. But with three billion people using Google services every day, what impact will it have if a handful of people don’t use their stuff? None, essentially. Google has already broken the Internet, and it’s too late to mend it now. Or so people tell me.

It’s certainly reasonable to ask, after a year or two of watching Google get more, not less, entrenched in our lives, despite our best de-Googling efforts – what’s the use? When I can do so little, why should I bother doing anything at all?

From a purely utilitarian perspective, doing nothing at all makes sense. On the face of it, my life is made more difficult by de-Googling and, if nobody else’s life is improved, I haven’t increased the overall amount of happiness in the world. Even if my mental health were improved by de-Googling – as I believe it is – any net benefit is a selfish one.

This argument – that we’re not changing the world – can’t be countered on pragmatic grounds: it’s a moral matter. Google is an oppressive, destructive organization, and we should resist it, even if our resistance stands no chance of success. What I tell prospective re-Googlers is: it’s true that we can’t beat Google, but we need not be complicit in Google’s behaviour.

It isn’t a bad thing, to fight an unwinnable fight. We admire people who fight – against oppression, cruelty, or just indifference – with no real expectation of success. Spartacus and his small band of escaped slaves took on the military might of the whole Roman republic – and lost comprehensively. The Romans crucified all six thousand of the survivors of their revolt. But two thousand years later, Spartacus remains a symbol of the nobility of fighting for a just, hopeless cause.

In the Roman Catholic tradition there is even a patron saint of lost causes. St Jude embodies the respect we feel for those people throughout history who did the right thing in the face of overwhelming opposition. To fight in such circumstances is not merely acceptable, it is necessary. After all, a fight one can’t win is the only kind of fight that is not motivated by self-interest. Spartacus’ slave revolt might have been one of the only truly “just wars” in human history.

By de-Googling, we’re being a tiny bit like Spartacus. Only a tiny bit, of course because, let’s face it, the amount of self-sacrifice required to de-Google is small. Nobody ever died from lack of Google. While I tell people that de-Googling is the hill I’ve chosen to die on, I don’t really expect to be backing up my principles with my own blood.

In short, it isn’t morally right to de-Google in spite of the fact that we can’t beat Google; it’s right because we can’t beat Google.