Saturday Morn
Feb. 6th, 2021 09:15 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
degringolade
Abstract Expressionism / William Scott/ Five Pears
I spent years over at Blogger. For a while there in the long ago I was kinda-sorta in the “not-quite-in crowd” with a hundred-some-odd followers and was answering replies every day.
Then I started noticing that the replies were affecting my writing. When I wrote about certain subjects in certain ways, I would get more positive responses. When I wrote about the same subjects from a different point of view I would get trolled at an alarming rate. There are a bunch of responses over there that never saw the light of day as they were straight ad-hominem attacks because I took the time to step into the wrong set of shoes for a brief walk.
Then I caught myself changing the way I expressed what I was thinking in order to elicit the most positive responses. It was at that point I figured out that I wasn’t writing what I truly was thinking, I was writing what I thought would make people like me.
At the end, I folded up and quit blogger and tried to find a different site. I tried Wordpress on for size, but I never liked the interface. Then when JMG came over here to Dreamwidth, I decided to give it a go. I actually kinda liked the kludgey interface and the off-beat clientele. Plus the fact, the comments are usually civilized and fun.
All of this is leading up to the following. This is still just an odd form of diary. I tend to write things down here as a way to work through what I am thinking about that day and to attempt to arrange things into a coherent whole. I fail sometimes and folks find my views on a specific subject offensively incorrect.
But that is the whole point of this process. I do not for a moment think that I have access to the entire data set. All of the opinions that have been expressed in this venue are simply that: Opinions. Even worse, they are opinions arrived at using "facts" presented in the conflicting and incomplete narratives spun by an industry and a government that are intent on doing what they think will work best for them. What works best for them is not at all the same thing as what is best for us.
No one has the whole story. Everyone is being told something in a manner that advances someone else’s interests. Hell, even Qanon gets things right sometimes.
You have to decide just how important this shit is to you. I consider it roughly equivalent to going swimming in the ocean and then complaining about the water temperature. Complaining and arguing over national politics and the character of individuals you have never met seems silly in the light of the simple fact that the “information" that allows us to form our opinions have been distilled by these other parties in order to advance that other parties agenda seems to me a bit of a waste of time.
What About Offensively Correct?
Date: 2021-02-06 10:07 pm (UTC)Questions: What indicates “offensively”? What are your possibilities for the future?
1) Remove the reply button. Not a needed feature for a diary.
2) Possible New Rule: no comment will be posted if it suggests that a point made in a posted article is wrong - even if the author of the posted article is wrong and aggravating.
3) Possible New Rule: Replies that suggest something written in a posted article is wrong, will be considered, if the reply contains a reasonable explanation to support the argument. Such a reply will not be judged offensive.
*****
“Even worse, they are opinions arrived at using "facts" presented in the conflicting and incomplete narratives spun by an industry and a government that are intent on doing what they think will work best for them.”
Comment: This need not be the case!
For example, everything I have attributed to Trump, has come DIRECTLY from him to me. The only filter is the video equipment that recorded what I see and hear. Also, besides the rallies and taped speeches, etc., there are actual executive orders, and all the actual words that Trump himself poked into his phone and sent out to everybody. Watch the rallies and speeches and read what Trump wrote - nothing more is needed. The 30,000 lies are real and recorded and the rallies happened.
The same applies to all politicians and political activity. The “progressive” attack on MSM suggests that commentary is some sort of requirement. Bull; who says? Maybe the “progressives” are too full of themselves, and crap.
If somebody wants to know what AOC (or the “Squad”) thinks, for example, what does the press have to do with the task? Listen to her messages and read what she writes. What I see with her is 95% talk about helping the poor people in the country. So why do MAGA people want to kill AOC? Watch a rally to see why.
*****
“incomplete narratives spun by an industry and a government”
Question: What is worse, the above, or incomplete narratives spun by writers like Ilargi and Mon Seul Desir?
I say tie, being generous to the latter, based on their posted essays.
*****
“No one has the whole story. Everyone is being told something in a manner that advances someone else’s interests. Hell, even Qanon gets things right sometimes.”
a) But everyone can have the same REAL story, per the above.
b) Please provide an example to support what you say after “Hell”.
*****
“You have to decide just how important this shit is to you. I consider it roughly equivalent to going swimming in the ocean and then complaining about the water temperature.”
Now I see one of the problems. The posted articles are about the rot and collapse of immoral and destructive political and economic systems, and if we think the author is misguided and wrong and aggravating too, we should just read it, eat it, be glad you directed us to it, and move on.
Perhaps the article subjects are too serious for what the situation calls for?
*****
“Complaining and arguing over national politics and the character of individuals you have never met seems silly in the light of the simple fact that the “information" that allows us to form our opinions have been distilled by these other parties in order to advance that other parties agenda seems to me a bit of a waste of time.”
Comment: I never met Hitler, but I hear he was quite the douchebag.
Not that Hitler is like Trump; but there are Americans who proudly say and demonstrate that they admire Hitler, and it happens that these Americans like Trump, and Trump likes their votes and money - because they are fine people just like the people who do not like Hitler’s ideas. I guess this sort of attempt to unify us need not aggravate anybody - now that you suggest so. Maybe we do all need to lighten up.
... because now I am starting to complain about the temperature of the water in the ocean, just like those enviro-whackos who complain about the temperature of the air going up two degrees!
There must be a balance somewhere – somewhere that is getting close to “ignorance is bliss”. If I read your message correctly, future comments must be closer to the “ignorance is bliss” end of the spectrum.
Sounds like the plan is to hold tight and wait for our immoral and destructive system to finish rotting and collapse, and then decide what to do. I guess that will be Ok as long as we can keep reality from rearing up it's ugly head in the meantime.
Minister of Truth
Date: 2021-02-07 01:38 am (UTC)I say this is how a bad idea gets started. Who is the next Minister after the good Minster Bill Maher?
If a Ministry of Truth seems like a good idea, then it is probably too late. Lying has become accepted; meaning people do not trust each other. Then people accept any story just to have one story. Sounds bad to me.
Everybody could learn what they need to know about a politician without the press. Why do they not do it?
Probably because the MSM is more entertaining than doing research like watching an hour video of a candidate taking about their platform. So the MSM sucks, but the problem is that they give the people what they want; or at least that is what they are trying to do.
Another reasonable understanding
Date: 2021-02-07 02:20 am (UTC)The purpose of a reply is simply to give an opinion or information on an article posted or whatever. Or possibly just to piss you off; but hopefully nobody would do that. Seems to me that nobody would do that.