Social media has been a transparent race to the bottom for many years. The sooner it is shittified beyond repair the better. AI flooding content to them should help speedrun its descent, or maybe I’ve giving the average user (above child age) too much credit.
And anyone that wants to use WW2 as a model for their theory of change is also (I hope) glossing over the abominable death toll. "Once sufficient 10s of millions of people die, everyone will be so horrified and traumatized by the widespread death and destruction that they'll be have no choice but to collaborate to enact the better world I'm picturing," beyond relying on an n of 1 and ignoring the decades of cold war that ensued, is also...hard to argue is worth it.
I have a hypothesis that network effects kick in for social interaction before they do for monetisation, which is why the advertisers/influencers/propagandists/scammers(/trolls, though this is different) are in a constant state of hunting down and infesting whatever platform good-faith users have most recently fled them too. Part of it is likely that smaller communities are more robust and have an easier time identifying and repelling smaller-scale incursions, but I suspect a big part is that smaller communities simply aren't worth the investment of larger incursions, especially since they'll more easily be ruined before any real payout.
Anyway, I agree with you that "quality" (as in effort and craft) is lower on the list of factors than authenticity, which makes complete sense. There was a time when a well-crafted ad was worthy of note, but ads have been so sneaky and pervasive that I think many people are desperate to have a spontaneous interaction or experience that's not trying to sell them anything.