Abstract This essay analyzes the structural conditions under which public deliberation ceases to be operative and social coordination begins to degrade. Using a concrete empirical episode as a point of departure, it identifies recurring patterns in collective systems that organize coherence around identity and narrative rather than around a shared factual framework. It describes how, in the absence of common criteria for fact validation, disruptive information is not processed or refuted but excluded as incompatible with the dominant narrative frame. This dynamic is examined as a problem of epistemic infrastructure rather than as a moral or psychological failure of individual actors. The analysis extends to the impact of AI-mediated environments, showing how algorithmic personalization and affinity-based optimization accelerate processes of cognitive fragmentation and the collapse of common factual ground. The objective is not to propose normative solutions or interpret specific actors or conflicts, but to delineate the minimal conditions that make coordination possible among individuals and groups who do not share values, trust, or narratives, yet depend on a common reality to operate. Este ensayo no analiza eventos políticos específicos ni propone interpretaciones normativas sobre actores, ideologías o conflictos particulares. Utiliza episodios empíricos como insumos para identificar patrones de funcionamiento recurrentes en sistemas colectivos de alta escala. Su objetivo no es persuadir ni ofrecer soluciones deseables, sino describir condiciones estructurales bajo las cuales ciertos comportamientos emergen de forma predecible, independientemente de la intención individual de los actores. El criterio de validez no es la adhesión ni el consenso, sino la capacidad explicativa transversal y el costo comparado del error frente a marcos alternativos.