Letters From Facebook Jail: Day 16

Corporate capitalism is a train running full speed towards a cliff. Whatever brakes the train once had have been stripped from it in order to streamline its forward movement.

We are all passengers on this train, lured aboard by the promise it would take us where we wanted to go. And it has delivered all it has promised and more, at least for those of us not shoveling the coal. The only problem is, every time we arrive at the station we believed was the promised land, the train just kept going. What would have been viewed as technological miracles by our grandparents now clog our landfills because they are last generation technology nobody wants. Thus far, all that we are told would give us happiness ends up being discarded as worthless.

We got on this train not merely because of the material goods corporate capitalism provided us but because we were led to believe such products would bring us happiness. But the happiness achieved by our acquisitions is transitory, leaving in its wake a greater emptiness that must be filled. Each time we acquire a new possession, we are again made unhappy the moment the newest model comes out. Our vehicles are more spacious than prior generations ever would have imagined or even thought to ask for, our televisions sport larger screens and higher definition than our parents would have thought tasteful for placing in their living rooms. We possess so many toys and gadgets that we have to build or rent storage units for them. Our electronic devices provide us with more ways of amusing and distracting ourselves than ever before. And yet, although such devices leave us no time to dwell upon how we feel, we are dimly aware of a growing discontent in the same way we are dimly aware of the train wheels as they move us further along the tracks towards humanity’s doom.

Doom IS the inevitable destination. It is obvious to anyone willing to look out their windows and see what’s going on outside our comfortable train compartments. We are using every last possible resource we can get our hands on in order to increase the speed of this runaway train. Somewhere deep within us we know real changes have to be made, but the seats upon which we sit are just so damned comfortable, and reality so very frightening.

If corporate capitalism is a runaway train headed towards the abyss, establishment media are the well-paid attendants who offer us fluffy pillows for a slight fee. They offer to close our blinds for us should we desire to take a nap, offer us unhealthy banquets that leave us lethargic, and provide us with a thousand different escapist movies for us to watch. In all ways, they try to make things pleasant for us, insisting only that we remain in our seats for our own safety. And we must never question where it is we are going. There is no destination, only progress.

Should we ever provide ourselves the quiet moments required for honest reflection, we would be forced to admit some unpleasant but necessary truths. We are depleting our natural resources at a fevered and irrational pace. We destroy nature to create unneeded products we use to reward ourselves with in order to numb our anxiety. We devastate our environment in waging endless war against those whose ideologies might impede the advancement of the train that is leading us to our own graves. We waste our energies and creativity in the manufacture of drugs and penitentiaries in order to medicate and imprison those who are unable or unwilling to sit quietly as the train’s speed increases. Most of all, we lay waste to nature because it often provides free alternatives to that which corporations wish to sell you.

Nature can provide food without cost. It can provide us with wisdom that even our most prestigious and expensive universities cannot. It gives us opportunities for exercise superior to any treadmill or climbing wall. It can give us an understanding of freedom that a Harley Davidson or maxi-pad never can. And it is able to give us a sense of contentment superior to anything pharmaceuticals provide. Sadly, what it cannot do is pay advertisers to advocate for it. Commercials scream, nature whispers.

Corporate capitalism is the reason our climate is quickly being converted to one unsuitable for human habitation. Under no circumstances would a corporation want you to use less energy when corporations profit off your energy use. They will never encourage you doing without what you do not need to begin with because they profit from selling you that which does not make you happy. And if what they have sold you does not make you happy, they have a product that is sold as a cure for that. And so the living creatures in our oceans are replaced with plastic particles and oil spills, the wild creatures in our forests and prairies are replaced by caged animals on factory farms. All that is holy, all that is natural, is being replaced by that which is profitable. Corporate capitalism is at war with nature.

And as corporate capitalism is at war with nature, corporate media is at war with reality. They call it marketing but it could just as well be called corporate propaganda. There is no other message to be had from our televisions, no other alternate way of viewing our situation. Turn on the television and you will not hear one voice speaking out on behalf of nature. Nature has no money to spend on air time. Neither do the poor, the elderly, or the victims of war. All of the power of the media’s voice comes from corporations paying to have their message spread.

The choice is becoming starker as the train builds up steam: the planet or the corporations. The train which carries us forward is undoubtedly a remarkable feat of engineering, but there is no longer any reasonable doubt that the ride cannot continue much longer. We must do all that is in our power to stop its hurtling towards its undeniable destination. The seating is undeniably luxurious, but it will not comfort us once the crash occurs. And the distraction the media supplies is assuredly pleasant, but on the day the illusion is stripped away, it will not drown out the cries of those in agony from the train wreck. The terminus is far closer than anyone in the media will have you believe.

Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter or Facebook, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.

Letters From Facebook Jail: Day 20

The Media Has Interests, And They Don't Align With Yours

I previously wrote about how the media will never permit you the presidential candidate you want. They may dangle a few interesting candidates in front of you to sucker you into the game, but you’re never going to get that candidate. They will do whatever is required to peel enough votes from the candidate that got you interested in politics in the first place, then do the old bait and switch. There is no level of smear that won’t be used to get such a candidate to the point where the media can then deem his cause hopeless, and then say the only sensible course for him is to back the establishment candidate.

Unelectable. It is a word seemingly used only in presidential races, and then only on Democratic candidates. Just like third-party candidates are only called spoilers if they’re running to the left of Democrats. You never here the Libertarian candidate called a spoiler. You never heard Ross Perot called a spoiler as he was running his campaign. You never heard Trump deemed unelectable. But Ralph Nader was a spoiler and Tulsi Gabbard is a divider because their campaigns are “unwinnable”. They are unwinnable because the media will never allow them to win, or their issues to be seriously considered.

You never hear the media say a game is unwinnable for the underdog, do you? They never say, “Nah, no use watching this game, viewers, The Patriots are going to destroy them." That’s because, even if it is often true, it is not in the interest of the media or its advertisers to have you tune out. The media will do everything in its power to get you invested in a rivalry, do anything to create drama. 

Besides, the media loves a good Cinderella story. There’s nothing they like more than a good upset, a Rocky defeating Apollo or the U.S. Hockey Team taking down the Soviets. Until it is corporate interests who are in the role of the wicked step-sisters, at which point they will treat Cinderella like Carrie. Yeah, I used to think Stephen King’s bad guys were unrealistically sadistic, but the depths to which the media sinks proves otherwise.

Unelectable. It’s odd that nobody said that about Donald Trump, a man with orange skin, three divorces, four bankruptcies and a grifter’s history. A guy who was on tape saying "Grab 'em by the *****. Nobody said he should drop out of the race because he couldn’t win. They secretly must have thought he couldn’t, but they never said so. If they had believed Trump had a chance to win, they would have started the whole Russiagate story BEFORE he was elected. Trump was an “oops”, and the full court press of Russiagate was their way of containing the accident before it caused too much damage.

As I see things, Tulsi Gabbard is the candidate most capable of being a uniter. She appeals to people from across the political spectrum and for the best of reasons. She is a veteran and a principled politician. She has the potential of overcoming the partisan politics that is absolutely tearing our nation apart and keeping us from dealing with issues that have broad appeal. But the media does not want a uniter. The media does everything in its power to divide us, rile up our emotions and shut down our minds. If you get angry every time you think about politics, you cannot deny it’s true. It’s been this way for decades and it’s only going to get worse until we can find some way out of our partisanship. That would not be good for ratings, nor would it be good for the corporations that have no desire to see popular issues enacted. The revolution will not be televised.

Whatever your opinions of Tulsi Gabbard, they are most likely your opinions because of what the media chose to tell you about her. Go ahead, without thinking about it, state an opinion you have about Tulsi Gabbard. Now, if you’re brave, type in the exact words you used in Google and see if you don’t get a match with whatever outlet you get your news from (if you said "toadie", I'm guessing you read the New York Times). Don't feel bad, the media spends more energy manipulating you than you have to uncover their manipulations. 

The media will never give you the candidate YOU want because it will never be the candidate THEY want. If the two ever align, you should have serious doubts about your candidate. But it’s not just presidential candidates. The media will never allow you to have Medicare For All, open government, fracking bans, affordable pharmaceuticals, penalties for corporate crimes, peace, etc. You will likely never again see a prominent politician or a corporate executive go to prison again unless the crimes they committed were against the powerful. You will never get what you want, what  the planet needs, until you realize the media is not your friend but your gaslighter. 

The media will never give us the information we need to change our society from one focused on serving corporations to one focused on serving human beings. It’s not in their best interest. Corporate media will only give you corporate talking points. I don’t know why that is so hard for people to understand. 

The fact that they have you believing in a magical system where corporate profits result in the best of all possible products for the customer IS in fact true in this case. But where they have deceived you is by having you believe you are the customer. You're not, because you're not the one paying Sean Hannity's and Rachel Maddow's obscene salaries . You get what you pay for and nobody pays much of anything nowadays for the news they consume. News that is given to you for nothing is not news, it’s propaganda. It’s advertisement for what they want to sell you, which is corporate values and corporate fantasies of how the world works. The only thing that keeps the propaganda from ruling you completely is that it is so far removed from the reality you have to live in.

Therein lies our hope. The more the media lies, the more it has to lie. The greater the difference between observable phenomena and the official narrative, the easier it will be to spot the lie. We’re at the point where we don’t need a Buddha to pierce the veil of illusion, we’re simply waiting for a child to innocently say the emperor has no clothes. Actually, it will take quite a few of us. We will all have to shout as loud as we can that corporate media will only ever support corporate interests, and corporate interests are the greatest threat to the future of humanity. The lies are necessarily louder, clumsier, more aggressive, because the situation for humanity is becoming increasingly more tenuous and harder to deny. We are flooding our oceans with plastic, poisoning and consuming its fish, heating the water with our CO2 emissions with what oil we do not spill into the oceans directly. 

The time will come when the lie breaks down, it is unavoidable. But there is no guarantee it will come in time. That is up to us. Now's not the time for shyness, insecurity, or self-doubt. A planet is at stake.

Letters From Facebook Jail: Day 15

We See Fascism Only On The Other Side

Fascism is coming. Your can hear the sound of its marching jackboots as they strike the pavement. Left, Right, Left Right…

You can see it too, but only in the eyes of your enemy. You’ll never see it in the mirror, or in the eyes of those in your tribe. Only in the enemy. An enemy so fascistic they must be brought to heel. An enemy so devious that their voices must be silenced. An enemy actively engaged in treason, willing to work with foreign agents in order to destroy our country and the values on which it was built. There are foreign thoughts being disseminated by enemies of the fatherland— Oops. I didn’t mean to say that. What I meant to say was that the people in the other party are actual, real-life fascists. It’s not my fault that their fascism has me thinking illogically and calling for censorship and violence.

That is the attitude I often encounter from both liberals and conservatives. It truly is easier to see the speck in the other’s eye than the plank in your own. But if you allowed yourself to be honest with yourself, I’m willing to bet you’d feel it. It feels like fear and hatred and justification for just about any sort of behavior that you swear you’re against.

There are those who will tell you the battle between Democrats and Republicans is a battle between freedom and fascism, but in truth it is a battle between the Brown Shirts and the SS. We are working at fascism from two directions. The Republicans through overt contempt for law, decency, and the pursuit of objective truth, as well as a love of the image of the strong man. The Democrats for their promotion of war, censorship, and unaccountable intelligence agencies. And whenever they punch at one another, they seldom punch towards the other’s fascistic tendencies. No matter who’s party is in power, the other will always support increases in military spending, police protection, and increased spying.

The corporate media does nothing to quiet hatred, fear, and fascistic tendencies. The media only fuels such behavior. Whether they are actively pushing conflict or just willing to go along with it for the sake of ratings is a debate to be had, but I’m certain there’s a degree of both involved. And whatever their motivation, they will never, ever, question war. And as bad as all the other aspects of fascism are, war is the worst.

Sometimes I engage in or simply follow a debate on social media and I will see an argument that is nowhere near approaching reality. Then, a day later, I will see the very same, cognitively dissonant thought-vomit spewed nearly verbatim elsewhere by someone else. When you see such stupid ideas expressed practically verbatim by total strangers, there is only one explanation: effective propaganda.

And I see such nonsensical arguments from liberals and conservatives alike, see ideas shit out by those who have consumed them without having bothered to digest them. Though both sides may be subjected to different streams of propaganda, both streams are ultimately supporting the same power structure. And what is shat out by those who consume it smells noxious regardless of whether they ate from the conservative or the liberal trough.

It has gotten to the point where when I hear someone expressing original thoughts, or at least thoughts that have been well-reflected upon, it is hard to tell from which side of the ideological argument they belong. But when they reflexively spout the talking points of the mass media, I instantly can detect the source of their brainwashing.

It is more than a little disturbing to witness the media make its pronouncements and a thousand mouths move in unison to echo them, as if each individual was merely a hollow vessel used to amplify a message. It is difficult to admit to myself what a herd creature we humans truly are and how our opinions and convictions are shaped for the most part not by our own reflection and interpretation but rather by forces of which we are not aware.

Don’t get defensive. The science of propaganda is well-funded and researched. We’re all subjected to it nearly from the moment we wake up to the moment we go to bed, from the moment we were born to the moment we die. It’s why we drink water out of plastic bottles. Allow yourself to think for a few minutes and you will discover lots of things you do that make no sense but have been sold to you by the media. There is no shame in realizing you’ve been propagandized, but it is time to do something about it. For the moment, though, back to fascism.

The challenge as I see it is not so much to call people out on their fascistic beliefs but to try our best to keep people communicating and acting civilly towards each other. The only way to teach people respect is by example. This is not always easy, especially dealing with ideas and behaviors that are dangerously approaching the sort of thing that led to Hitler and Mussolini. But anyone with a degree of knowledge of history realizes that fascists are looking for an excuse to shut down communication. Hence censorship. Keep talking.

I was banned from Facebook for a month for posting an image of Nazi-era Christmas ornaments, one of which had a Swastika on it. I wasn’t supporting fascism, I was warning against it. I’m worried they are banning images of Swastikas not because they fear a resurrection of fascism but because through understanding history we might recognize fascism when it arrives. Make no mistake, any new fascism will not use the old symbols but will create appealing new ones.

Once again, I suggest to you that there is currently a war between corporate media and social media. Corporate media, and those it serves, feel threatened by social media and are doing everything in their power to limit its outreach. We must do all we can to stop that from happening. Rejecting the authority of the corporate media is not merely a good idea, it is a necessary step if we are to avert the very real and impending threat of fascism. We must weave our own narrative of compassion, cooperation and self-empowerment rather than accept the message of fear, hatred, and blind obedience.

The media won’t defuse the situation. It has proven itself to be an instigator, not a mediator. This leaves social media. We, using social media to speak with others in order to break out of the either/or proposition as framed by the bifurcated media, must elevate the conversation above the one of unending hatred between two groups. We must tear down the walls that separate us from them until there is only us. No small feat, but a necessary and worthy goal.

Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.

Letters From Facebook Jail: Day 14

Taking Responsibility For Shaping Our Society

When I was a child, my free time was spent with a bunch of other kids in an empty field playing ball. There were no parents involved, they trusted the group that we were hanging out with to look out for one another. I can’t think of a time an adult was required to get us of out a mess we had gotten ourselves into.

Not that it was all smooth sailing, of course. There was a lot of arguing over the rules of the game, but we played a lot more than we argued. We learned to work together, learned to compromise, learned that sticking to your point, even when you were right, was less fun than just giving in on what were ultimately small matters and getting on with the game. In this way we learned skills that would serve us when we became adults and had to live with each other when no one would be there to settle our disagreements.

In the neighborhood I live in now, there are no empty fields where children can gather far from the watchful eyes of adults. We do have a water park nearby, though. There are video cameras there that monitor those who walk past the chain link fence. Lifeguards watch the children, most of whom are also watched by helicopter parents. I worry that these children will never learn how to negotiate the rules, but only learn to obey them.

The world needs adults who are skilled in negotiating workable ways of arranging society. But we have been gradually abandoning our role as adults, preferring to remain children. I suppose it began when television entered our households. Spending more time with us and seeming to know more than our parents, it assumed the role of a third parent. It told us what kinds of food we’d like, what kind of language to use, and that purchasing things was the way to happiness. But unlike our parents, the television could never be negotiated with. We could only ever listen, not talk back.

Eventually, this first generation raised by television grew to adulthood. But a funny thing happened: while our real parents grew older and gradually passed the mantle of adulthood on to us, the television never did. The television remained young, and it continued to speak to us as though we were children. Television never had a rite of passage for us into adulthood. In fact, it told us that youth was everything, and so most of us refused to grow up and claim ownership of our society.

The transition from a society raised by parents to one raised by the authority of television became most apparent to me in the time of Jimmy Carter’s presidency. We were undergoing an energy crisis in the United States, and I remember President Carter appearing on TV to address the nation. He gave us the kind of advice our parents would have given us, what all parents would tell their children. Rather than turn up the thermostat, you should wear a sweater. By this time, we had learned from the television that our parents were hopelessly out of touch with the times. In a short amount of time, the last adult president would be replaced by a TV personality and pitchman.

The election of President Reagan was the victory of television over those generations that were not raised with a TV in their homes. The children were now firmly in the hands of the third parent, while mom and dad were busy earning a living. When people talked at the water cooler at work, they talked about what they saw on television the night before. Television was the authority figure that never got old and never relinquished its role as parent. In fact, it demanded you stay young.

By this point you’re probably wondering what all this has to do with the censorship of social media. Simple. Social media is a field far away from our parents, (i.e. the media). It is a place where we are allowed to negotiate with others the rules by which we get along. In social media we can talk not only with our friends and neighbors but also with those kids from another neighborhood who just happen to be wanting to join the game.

It’s a second chance for us to work on the tools that are necessary for adults to fashion the world rather allow it to be fashioned for us by adults. It is not the media of a couple of decades ago, where the information flowed in only one direction. Social media allows communication, and it allows you to talk back to the media where others can actually watch and be involved in the conversation. It is the answer to a media that supplanted our parents as the voice of authority and has treated us like children for our entire lives. The old media has finally grown feeble, and we have the opportunity to become adults at last.

Some are afraid of this. While all of us have to act like adults in our everyday lives, in our professional and family situations, we have not had to act like adults in terms of constructing a functioning society in a long time. Since most of us have never had to act like adults, we’d much prefer to allow adult decisions to be made by those we’ve come to accept as authority figures (i.e. whoever the media says is worthy). The media tells them social media is dangerous, and says the adults will fix it for us.

Make no mistake, though, there are no adults other than ourselves. In a group of children, the only ones brash enough to assume adult roles are those who are least trustworthy of such responsibility. As children they are known as troublemakers. As adults, we call them sociopaths.

These are the kind of people who want to take back control of the conversation, who want to police social media. This will happen so long as we permit ourselves to live in a society where communication flows only one way, where we are afraid to take responsibility for fashioning the rules with the other kids in the neighborhood, where our playgrounds are not open fields but fenced-in areas where cameras and guards monitor our every move (unless you’re Jeffrey Epstein).

It's time you moved out of your parents basement and made your way in the world.

Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.

Letters From Facebook Jail: Day 13

Corporate Media Vs. Citizen Journalism

If Mainstream Corporate Journalists and Internet Citizen Journalists were each a collective entity, they would sound something like this:

Mainstream Corporate Journalist: I am a journalist.

Internet Citizen Journalist: I'm just trying to point out facts.

MCJ: I work for a corporation.

ICJ: I work for myself.

MCJ: If I don’t earn a profit for my employers, I will be fired.

ICJ: I will likely never make a penny for my efforts.

MCJ: My money comes from corporate sponsors that include the pharmaceutical industry, the fossil fuel industry, and even military contractors.

ICJ: If I am lucky and do my job well, I will have supporters that throw a few bucks at me on Patreon.

MCJ: The more I speak for the powerful, the more successful I will be.

ICJ: The more I speak truth to power, the more successful I will be.

MCJ: I supported the Iraq War.

ICJ: I opposed the Iraq War.

MCJ I got up on television and said you were basically a traitor to your country if you opposed the Iraq War.(Joe Scarborough)

ICJ: Nevertheless, I went out on a street corner holding a sign opposing the Iraq war while rednecks in a pickup truck with a huge American flag swore at us and threatened us with violence.

MCJ: I said there was no doubt there were WMDs in Iraq.

ICJ: I didn’t believe it.

MCJ: I now refer to the Iraq War as a mistake.

ICJ: I now refer to the Iraq War as a crime.

MCJ: I hope that you will forget that I once supported the war so that I can maintain my appearance of having integrity.

ICJ: I hope you will remember that I opposed the war, thus proving my integrity.

MCJ: I work hard at my job in the hopes that one day I will get paid like Rachel Maddow or Sean Hannity.

ICJ: I work hard at my job in the hopes of saving the planet from environmental destruction and nuclear war.

MCJ: I have access to Robert Mueller and Mike Pompeo and am able to ask questions of them and get their responses.

ICJ: I point out how Robert Mueller is a liar and Mike Pompeo is an admitted liar and whatever they say should not be trusted.

MCJ: I have been making people aware of the protests in China.

ICJ: I have been making people aware of the protests in The United States. And Lebanon and Iraq and Equador and Chile and Columbia and Greece and France and…

MCJ: I have been ignoring Bernie Sanders and slandering Tulsi Gabbard.

ICJ: I have been pointing out this bias.

MCJ: I have been saying that Medicare For All is unaffordable.

ICJ: I’ve been saying that it is less expensive and covers more than our current system.

MCJ: I tell people they have to settle for the lesser of two evils.

ICJ: I’ve been telling people they have within them the power to change things for the better.

MCJ: I promoted Trump as a celebrity before he got involved in politics.

ICJ: I’ve never liked Trump.

MCJ: I show images of poor people in countries that are being sanctioned for disobeying Washington.

ICJ: I show pictures of homeless people living in tent cities in The United States.

MCJ: I sometimes mention climate change and ask what we can do about it without effecting our economy.

ICJ: I often mention climate change and say we won’t have an economy in a few years if we don’t do anything about it.

ICJ: I speak for the planet and say we must protect it.

MCJ: I speak for the fossil fuel industry and the automotive industry and say we need to power our economy.

ICJ: I speak for journalists and say nobody should go to jail for revealing the truth.

MCJ: I say Julian Assange isn’t a real journalist like Rachel Maddow and deserves to rot in prison.

ICJ: I say people need to put aside partisan politics and find ways to work together.

MCJ: I say Republicans are the enemy or the Democrats are the enemy, depending on whether I am working for FOX News or MSNBC.

ICJ: I frequently reference Martin Luther King Jr. and other important thinkers and leaders of history.

MCJ: I frequently reference Kanye West and other celebrities.

ICJ: I’m worried about the influence of money in American politics.

MCJ: I’m worried about the influence a picture of Jesus arm-wrestling the devil has on American politics.

ICJ: I want you to care about safe drinking water for Flint Michigan and elsewhere.

MCJ: I’m interested in letting you know which bottled water is best.

ICJ: I seek to enlighten you.

MCJ: I seek to entertain and titillate you.

ICJ: I want you to feel connected, so that you trust yourself.

MCJ: I want you to feel alienated, so that you trust the television.

ICJ: I want you to feel hopeful.

MCJ: I want you to feel fearful.

ICJ: I want you as a comrade.

MCJ: I want you as a loyal viewer.

ICJ: My voice is being censored.

MCJ: MY VOICE IS BEING AMPLIFIED.

Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.

Letters From Facebook Jail: Day 12

“As some Frenchman has said, ‘The stairway of time is ever echoing with the wooden shoe going up, the polished boot descending.’” -Jack London

The story of humanity is no different from the rest of the animal kingdom. It is the story of evolution. And evolution typically occurs at a pace so slow as to be unobservable by the ephemeral human being. It is human nature to desire that progress will come swiftly, so that the lifespan of a human can observe the entire story. But in truth we are individually only able to witness a brief chapter. Only the very wisest are able to see beyond the current events and characters of the day and catch glimpses of the overarching narrative. We call them prophets, philosophers, spiritual leaders. By heeding their words, and acting in faith that our behavior matters, we play our part in helping humanity towards a brighter day.

We are continually frustrated by the slow march of progress, so much so that we attempt to rush it, force our naïve and simplistic ideas of progress upon a world that is indifferent to our desires. We invest our emotions in convenient and simplistic movements, and turn to despair when they have not led us to the promised land. Or worse, we resort to violence in the hope that we might force the pieces into place. But to use violence to make the pieces fit is to hack at the pieces to make them unnaturally conform to our simplistic view of the world. It does not place the pieces where they are supposed to be and only makes the overall picture more chaotic and ugly. Not to mention the damage done to the individual pieces.

Nevertheless, we evolve. Those who cry out against the injustices of today are quick to point out that the conditions of slavery and tyranny still exist, merely under a different name, a different narrative. And they are of course right, but they ignore the bigger picture.

The staircase upon which the wooden shoe ascends and the polished boot descends is a spiral staircase. So that as we struggle to climb upwards we often find ourselves in the same spot we were before we began our efforts. We do not always see our progress, and indeed our progress does not always proceed in a straight line. Our progress is not always as undeniable as we would like it to be because the battle we wage is an existential one. The enemy we face is ignorance, and any pause in our fight against it leads to relapse.

It is our belief that we can go to war against the enemies of humanity and evolution and put a simple end to them. It does not work that way and never has. It is like going to war against the tide and declaring victory when it recedes. The battle is timeless.

It is only when we realize how vast the battle is, how insignificant our individual struggles and sacrifices are, that we can play our greatest part in a human evolution that began with the simplest single-cell life and may yet grow to what the ancients called the promised land. The sacrifices we make and must make will appear futile to us until we realize how immense and beautiful is the story of which we are a part. There are no star roles, but there are ample opportunities to make your mark. Divinity, like the devil, is in the details.

We are in a moment now that seems to be returning us to past examples of ourselves we had hoped to have left for good. But by obsessing over our fears, we neglect the opportunities that now present themselves that never existed before.

Social media is one such opportunity. Social media has allowed true grass roots leaders to emerge. On a personal level, any artist or thinker in the last twenty years who has gained my attention has done so through social media and the online communities that are interested in promoting new ideas, new voices, new art, and new ways of viewing the world. As the printed word once enabled humanity to share thoughts across vast geographical areas and vast stretches of time, so too does social media permit humans to spread ideas in ways that were previously unthinkable. As the printing press enabled thoughts and perspectives to spread out not merely to the elite but to the average person, the internet places such opportunities in nearly everyone's hands.

But as I have mentioned, the evolutionary struggle is an existential one. Just as those who wish to do away with primitive and violent means of organizing society work towards progress, those who desire to rule through force seek to control the means of communication. Censorship is nothing new, it is amply evident throughout history. But humanity’s desire for progress has historically been greater than its fear of where it would lead. Social media has always been more or less under the control of the elite, but they are becoming increasingly aware of the dangers that social media presents to them. They will do what they can, as people who desire to wield power over the masses have always done, to maintain control over what opinions and attitudes are available to the people whose approval is needed for their continued grip on wealth and power. I do not expect them to succeed in suppressing this newest method of transmitting information any more than they did when they tried destroying printing presses. But neither am I so naive as to believe that the struggle for progress will come easily or once and for all. Evolution, after all, is a struggle for the survival of the species. We need to be aware of that, and that is not an idea that the shapers of public opinion are eager to share with you.

Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.

Letters From Facebook Jail: Day 11

Nearly two centuries ago, Charles Mackay wrote a book called The Madness Of Crowds, which described the way crowds are capable of falling prey to manias, fads, and the leadership of demagogues who persuade them to commit to the most absurd ideas.

It is undeniable the depths of folly to which unthinking mobs of people can fall. The Salem Witch Trials, The Red Scares, and every major market bubble stand as testaments to groups of people surrendering their individual common sense to the momentum of a mob that seems to move in an unthinking fashion. The fact that Mackay’s book has been in publication for so long shows how aware we are of this flaw.

A book that is less well known is James Surowiecki’s The Wisdom Of Crowds, published in 2004. This book could not have been written much earlier in history because the world was not ready to latch onto the idea he puts forth. To quote from the dustcover, “James Surowiecki explores a deceptively simple idea: Large groups of people are smarter than an elite few, no matter how brilliant—better at solving problems, fostering innovation, coming to wise decisions, even predicting the future.”

This is a rather radical notion to even conceive of, that the masses are better at guiding society than an elite few. The history of civilizations is one of great people guiding their nations through important moments. It was not until Howard Zinn published A People’s History Of The United States that someone was willing to put forth the idea that history should deal with the lives and interests of the ordinary people. Nearly every society that has existed with a written language has been one with a hierarchical structure. Although monarchy and aristocracy were gotten rid of by the American Revolution, the unconscious mindsets of long-ingrained ways of doing things were not so lightly tossed aside. It is hard to rid yourself of mindsets when you are not even conscious of them. Much of what influences the way humans behave occurs at the subconscious level.

Humans have evolved an intelligence beyond any other in the animal kingdom. But in possessing such an intelligence, and in identifying so closely with that self-aware intelligence, we tend to forget it did not replace the brain of evolutionary ancestors but more or less placed itself atop of more primitive aspects of our brains. Those less sophisticated, more primitive ways of relating to the outside world still not only function but have an integral role in the way we deal with others and with society at large.

It is hard to see it in ourselves, but we can see these other kinds of intelligence at work when we observe other species interacting or working together as a community. We are told that birds and fish have an incredible ability to find specific breeding grounds far away, we can watch a colony of ants working together without requiring managers or politicians, can see dogs learning about each other merely by sniffing one another. There is genuine intelligence, one might even say wisdom, in creatures far less sophisticated than ourselves. Here’s the thing: the animals themselves aren’t even aware of the way they are communicating one with another, could not explain the way their relationships and societies work. The only thing we need concern ourselves with here, is that they do.

And human beings behave in many of the same ways, communicating and giving instructions on sub-conscious levels. To read Desmond Morris’s The Naked Ape is to have the veneer of sophistication peeled away from our perception of ourselves in order to see how much we behave like our simian relatives.

There is a sophisticated way humans interact which we are for the most part unaware. And that’s okay. We need not understand it anymore than an ant or a salmon, we need only calmly observe as we let it do its thing.

This may sound like a mystical idea, and in a sense it is. Perhaps what people have referred to as mystical experience has been the tapping into this subconscious but genetically innate way of interacting with each other. And as can be seen in The Wisdom Of Crowds, science is increasingly discovering that large groups of people putting their two cents in on a given problem can actually predict outcomes or devise strategies better than even the greatest experts in a given field.

Which brings me back to the central focus of my thoughts on communication: social media and the need for open and honest conversation on the internet. While the science is not yet in on this relatively new line of study, the potential is great enough that this approach should be thoroughly explored. And the internet is an amazing new way for humanity to communicate with each other on a scale never before imagined. My personal experience has been that the ability of people to change the lives of others they have never met and who they live far from is nothing short of amazing. The internet has provided a way for individual people to ask a question of utmost importance to them to total strangers and have many caring people give useful and even life-changing advice.

But let us not forget the madness of crowds, which is an undeniable potential danger. There is much room for mischief when we speak online with unknown people. How can we tap into the wisdom of crowds while shielding ourselves from the madness of crowds? The difference between madness and wisdom is that madness is led by strong emotion, whereas wisdom exists in calmness and the feeling that you do not need to control things. Learn to recognize that when you are feeling strong emotions, you are most likely slipping into madness. Learn to understand that so long as you are able to detach yourself from turmoil, you leave yourself open to wisdom.

Closely associated with emotional thinking is ego. Perhaps the two are inseparable. So long as you feel the need to assert your ego into a conversation, your emotions will inevitably flair up. So long as you view a discussion as a battle to be won, and others as foes to be defeated, ego will be served.

Be aware not only when you feel emotion and ego within yourself but also when you spot it in the narratives of others.There are people, those driven by ego, who will attempt to make social media an extension of the hierarchical society that still exists today, a society that is an echo of the authoritarian, aristocratic, and monarchical past from which we are still freeing ourselves. 

Indeed, that is why the freedom of social media is under attack at this moment, because it presents a very fundamental threat to those who now rule in the place of those who were once kings and queens. It is not merely an intellectual argument against hierarchy, it hits deeply into the visceral, subconscious level of the power structure. Those that rule, which is to say, those who feel it is their right to sit above humanity as a whole, cannot help but feel threatened by that, and they will forcefully react against it. They will warn you against the madness of crowds. It is your job to find the wisdom that exists in the mass of humanity sharing their unique ideas, opinions, perspectives, and their desire to make things work. Remember, just like other societies of animals, we are biologically programmed to make the system work.

Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.

Letters From Facebook Jail: Day 10

How To Be A Force For Positive Change On Social Media

My nephew is an atmospheric scientist. Yes, I am bragging, but there is also a reason I bring this up. The other day I was involved in an online discussion with him and he expressed his frustration with the fake news that spreads faster than he and the scientific community can respond to. I not only agreed but have often felt the frustration of trying to stamp out lies and misinformation only to have someone ignore the evidence I’ve shared with them and simply pile another piece of misinformation on the discussion.

As someone who has spent his life studying weather (from a young child he kept a daily weather log), my nephew shows a remarkable amount of restraint and patience in discussing the subject of climate change. More than I could muster, I confess. But as it is me who is the one most loudly crying out against censorship, I thought it my duty to take his frustration into consideration. Which got me thinking about how the whole idea of free speech in the age of social media is supposed to work. Therefore I share below my ideas for how to most effectively spread truth, good will, and positive change through social media. While my nephew’s frustration was the genesis of this article, my suggestions are not directed at him but to a larger audience.

-First, accept that this is the task that is before you. You may consider yourself a scientist or a teacher, a poet or a naturalist, but whatever you are, you are involved in a propaganda war. It is your job to sidestep the propaganda of powerful interests in order to connect on a human level with others. This should not be the way things are, it should not be your job to make people aware of the narratives implanted in society in order to advance the agendas of powerful and selfish groups, but it’s reality. You have to get over the idea there’s some great truth-telling machine out there that is going to do the work for you. Only humans can connect with other humans on a truly human level. And don’t think it’s too hard or someone else will do the job, because it’s a job that must be done and you are an important part of creating a better future.

-Speak with whatever authority you possess. Everybody has some area of expertise in which they know more than the average person. I’ve been involved in plenty of climate change discussions where people who are not climate scientists nevertheless throw out all kinds of statistics I am not prepared to refute. But I’m fairly researched in the area of propaganda and marketing and will stick to this area when arguing science. The fact that energy manufacturers admitted in internal documents they knew their product was causing climate change is pretty damning evidence against climate change denial. At the bare minimum, you are a human being earnestly searching for truth in a respectful manner. This alone demands respect and decency from anyone you engage with, and puts you a step above those who are mere cogs in a corporate machine pushing a corporate agenda. Call people out whenever you hear them uncritically regurgitating talking points from corporate think tanks.

-Speak honestly. If you are disingenuous in your argument, even if you win a battle you will lose the war.

-Speak courageously. You must let people know the depth of your commitment to your cause(s).

-Speak lovingly. You’re on the side of the good guys, right? Good guys don’t hate. Good guys don’t want to “destroy” people in an argument, they want to build consensus.

-Refuse to accept that there is an “us” and a “them”. Again, you are on the side of the good guys, or so you say. Good guys believe that we can all get along by respecting one another and basic principles. Even if you believe some people can never get along, believe in the majority of humanity who will help keep them adhering to general norms of decency.

-Stick to issues, not people or parties.

-Make respectful conversation the norm. Do everything you can to elevate the conversation and convince people that real dialogue is not only possible but expected.

-Invest in everyone you have a conversation with, but know when it is time to cut your losses. In other words, let people know you will give a fair listen to their thoughts, but realize when they are not doing the same for you. Some people will sap every last ounce of energy from you without ever really listening to what you share with them. Seek to engage with people, but avoid coddling them. As it says in The Bible, “But whoever does not receive you, neither listens to your words, when you depart from the house or from the village, shake the sand from your feet.”

-Remember when engaging in conversation on social media that you have no idea who you might be reaching. I’ve had conservatives love something I’ve posted with liberals in mind and liberals love what I’ve posted with conservatives in mind. Give honest insight into any topic and there will be someone you’ve reached you were not reaching for.

-Remember that you are not only speaking for yourself but for those who have no voice of their own: those who are silenced through fear, those who are imprisoned, future generations, those who do not speak English. Only you can give voice to the trees, the animals, the Earth. Open yourself up so that they might speak through you.

-Speak through example. Some people will never be convinced by argument. They may, however, be swayed by the way you live according to your beliefs. If you argue that something must be done about climate change, you better be able to show what you are personally doing to combat climate change. The solution may not be through individual actions, but we must do what we can to eliminate any stumbling blocks others might encounter in our personal conduct.

-On a related note, if you are doing your part and making sacrifices to combat a problem, don’t be shy about sharing it. Let people know that you are doing your part and that it is necessary for others to do their part as well.

-If you are speaking from a very real and honest conviction, there is no shame in arguing from a position of strength. Use whatever skill you possess to put your case forward as convincingly as possible.

-When engaging in conversation, be always willing to learn. Realize that whatever you say is but a part of a larger conversation. Communication, at its best, is a melding of minds. Being able to lose yourself in a conversation is one of the great joys of being human. Whenever possible, bring that childlike part of you that engaged in late-night conversations with friends during sleepovers. Convert people to the joy of real, open, communication.

-Be aware of abusive behavior so that you do not fall into the traps of abusive people, mindsets, and institutions. Nobody believes they’re capable of being manipulated and bullied until it’s too late. Learn the signs. Much of the destructive narratives in society are there because of gaslighters.

-Educate yourself on logical fallacies and look for them being used.

Those are a few ideas for making communication through social media more productive and maybe even more pleasant. Just as there is a potential for madness in crowds, there is also a potential for genius. But I have 20 more days to go in my Facebook ban, so I will save that for another night.

Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.

Letter From Facebook Jail: Day 9

The Excuse For Censorship

No matter how convinced I am of a narrative, I always take time to listen to reasoned opinions and uncomfortable facts that run contrary to my convictions. If I did not take the time to do so, I’m afraid I would fall back on lazy and/or emotional thinking. Let your emotions take control of your ability to reason and you are in serious danger of being manipulated by others who are only too willing to feed the narrative that speaks to your emotional needs.

I bring this up because I am going to discuss the reason, or should I say excuse, used to justify a sweeping tide of censorship. In truth, as corporations and those who use the military to further their interests overseas grow more powerful, and internet communication between ordinary citizens has grown more sophisticated, the need for censorship was inevitable. There was just no way that the powers that be could continue to make life more unmanageable for the average person while increasing average person's ability to work with his fellow man/woman.

Those who control the narrative pushed it an amazingly long way through propaganda alone. By bringing out an articulate African American with style, they were able to extend the narrative for one last go round. In a lot of ways, simply knowing that we had elected a black president spoke to our beliefs in the innate goodness and unstoppable progress of our nation. Nobody else but Barack Obama could have pulled off eight years of Americans feeling good about themselves, while in real terms things were continuing to proceed in the way they had under George W. Bush. And Clinton. And Bush. And Reagan. The illusion of progress ended with Obama. With the narrative of progress played out, a new narrative of fear and outrage must be woven. And with fear and outrage would come the unfortunate but necessary call for censorship.

But first, an excuse would be required. 9/11 went a long way in forcing Americans to give up on ideas like privacy, but given that the Patriot Act was pushed by a Republican administration, a lot of Democrats were leery of assaults on our civil rights. And besides, freedom of speech had long been a main tenant of the liberal class, who fought against warning labels on music and proudly announced during National Banned Book Week that they were reading 1984 or Lolita. Something special would be required to have liberals cheering for censorship, something that would appeal to their fear and loathing rather than their intellect. Enter Donald Trump.

Donald Trump’s being elected president was not met with stoic acceptance by supporters of Hillary Clinton. Liberals were in no mood for self-reflection when it dawned on them that the American public, at least in the states that mattered, would rather reject the reliable running play up the middle and instead choose to try a Hail Mary pass to the receiver that was so incompetent that nobody bothered to guard him. When the bumbling oaf managed to hold onto the ball and take it over the goal line, nobody on the losing team was willing to accept that they lost fair and square.

Imagine it’s the Super Bowl, the other team comes from behind and scores at the last second, and you realize you will have to wait another year and go through all the agony of the season for you to even hope to get a chance to win the big game. You’re not exactly going to be in a rational state. Now imagine someone in the recall booth says the guy who caught the pass had his feet out of bounds. Does your heart not leap at the prospect?

Now imagine the anonymous guy in the replay booth tells you the guy’s feet were clearly out of bounds, and the only reason it was ruled a reception was that the guy who called it a touchdown was handed a big wad of cash from a Russian mobster. Are you going to call him a liar?

A lot of you people are going to want to believe, especially when The Fox Channel, who will be losing a lot of football fans now that the season is over, uncritically accepts what the guy in the booth is selling.

Never once will they show the replay, but that won’t matter to you. You know in your heart of hearts that you didn’t really lose that game, that you were too good and noble and the receiver was too incompetent to make that catch fair and square. And besides, The Fox Channel wouldn’t be bringing it up if it weren’t true. They have reporters there that met with the guy in the booth and they all swear that he saw what he said he saw. Even though they themselves didn’t see it. You just have to believe the guy in the booth. Americans would NEVER mess with the sacred game that is the Super Bowl, only the dastardly Russians, with wanton disregard of all that the Super Bowl entails—The Puppy Bowl and the Clydesdale Horses and the Halftime spectacle—would stoop so low.

And so the opportunity that the forces of censorship have been waiting for has arrived. People who care so much about their country that defeat has aroused their emotions at the expense of their better nature. In the heat of the battle, they’ve abandoned one of the very principles they were fighting to defend, the idea of free speech. The idea that truth, if allowed to battle it out on the playing field, will win out even over the best-crafted lies. The Left, which I had always considered the team that would fight for freedom of speech even when the Right was willing to make exceptions, is now—if not the driving force—at least the willing accomplice of the push for censorship. Of course, there’s a really good reason for it. There are always good reasons to be found when betraying sacred principles.

And by the way, it’s a stupid game, I hate the team that won, the guy’s an oaf that doesn’t belong on the field, but his feet were in bounds for once. Instead of complaining that the other team cheated, maybe you should ask why your team benched its star player.

Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.

Letters From Facebook Jail: Day 8

The Artist In The Age Of Social Media

Around the time that I was finishing up the first draft of my first novel, I started trying to figure out how I could get it published. While until recently there really was only one option—find a publisher—my research led me to meet many people who were self-publishing and making a good income doing so. After weighing the options, and mainly being impatient enough to want to get my work in front of readers instead of sitting on desks of uninterested publishing houses, I opted to self-publish.

Don’t get me wrong, there are many advantages to having a publisher and a team of professionals making sure your work is as good as it can be. Many are the times I wistfully think of how much easier it would make my life to have someone do the layout for book covers, have people be responsible for proofreading, editing, marketing, etc. But I learned from other writers who had gone the traditional route that the job of marketing is, for most books, mainly in the author’s hands. Publishers are in the game to make money, not to advance the literary culture. I kind of knew that already, but it was nice to have it told to me by people who had been there.

The reason I chose to take the self-publishing route more than anything, though, was the desire to stay true to my own vision rather than be forced to change things by someone who just didn’t understand what I was trying to accomplish. I leave open the option of one day finding a traditional publisher, but if I do I want to be in a position of power where I can prove that I understand my audience and what they want to read, rather than conform to the formula of whatever is in fashion at the moment.

I knew this would not be easy. I knew it would take years to build up a catalog of work. At least equally important, I learned from others the necessity of having an internet presence. Blogging, Tweeting, networking, these were all things I’d have to do in order to build an audience from scratch simply by writing about the things I was most passionate about. In truth, it has been more difficult than I’d hoped. But I’ve come to appreciate the journey even more than the goal itself. Where once I would have considered myself a writer because a publisher gave me their approval, I now feel myself to be one because of the time, effort, and diligent search for truth I have put into my art. More than that, I have heard from people who have related to the thoughts I've expressed. At last I feel I can call myself an indie-writer and take pride in that label.

But the long struggle to build up a group of people willing to regard my opinions as worthy of reading has hit upon an unexpected snag. In the last couple of years, censorship has become a reality in social media. Anyone who is at all involved in anti-war activism is aware of the clampdown on those who advocate for peace, point out the horrors of war, or suggest that our next attempt to overthrow another nation’s government will cause untold suffering. The most obvious, of course, is Julian Assange, who sits in jail as his physical and mental health deteriorate. Then there is Max Blumenthal, a journalist for the Gray Zone who was recently arrested (in a SWAT-team-style apprehension) for an alleged assault charge relating to his coverage of the siege of the Venezuelan embassy. Any indie journalist will tell you that questioning the stories that are used to promote militarily involvement in another country will get your video demonetized on YouTube, if not banned. And then there are the countless people I’ve heard about and know personally who are being banned from Facebook for sharing information that is contrary to the official pro-war agenda.

Let me also remind you that as I write this, I am serving day 8 of my 30-day ban from Facebook. My crime was sharing a picture of Christmas ornaments from the Nazi era, one of which had a Swastika on it. I shared it not because I’m a fan of Nazis but because we all need to be reminded of what societies are capable of turning into. And let me tell you, censorship is not a good sign of where we’re headed.

Over a year ago, I came across the story of Peter Van Buren. An author of several books and someone who speaks frequently against war, Peter had managed to collect an impressive amount of Twitter followers. I don't recall the number, but I remember thinking it must have taken in him years of hard work to amass so many followers. Peter was permanently suspended from his Twitter account. I do not know exactly what the reason was, and it is impossible to speculate because all traces of his account have disappeared. He was not merely banned, he was vanished. 

This sort of thing must give artists pause. While most of us want to stay true to our vision and beliefs, at some point we start questioning whether compromise might be preferable to not being heard at all. Many artists are fearless and respond forcefully against such tactics, heedless of the costs. But many are rather fragile flowers that will wither under such conditions. It will do no good in the fight against evil to make a world where artists are not encouraged to blossom, to be open and honest and reveal those thoughts they have been nourishing within. 

I am currently writing book 3 on a series that has a very anti-war message. Whereas the first book dealt with the leadup to World War I, and the second book dealt with the war itself, the third book deals with the leadup to World War II. This will unavoidably involve Nazis. Researching this book made me come across the picture I was banned for in the first place. The book cover I had planned involved an image of the Earth with a Swastika behind it on one side, a peace sign on the other. I have to seriously rethink my cover now for fear that if I share it on social media, I might get banned for the image that’s on it. And part of me fears it is not the image of the Swastika they are most concerned with but the peace sign.

Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.

Letters From Facebook Jail: Day 7

Freedom Of Speech...If Corporations Say It's Okay

In times past, much of public life was conducted in the public square. Should someone feel the need to share something with his fellow citizens, he would literally get up on a soapbox to address the people who were there. Assuredly, a good amount of them were cranks, and a good deal more were simply annoying, but by and large, it was an accepted practice. If the speaker was speaking nonsense, the people wouldn’t hesitate to talk back to him, as one would a performance one did not appreciate. In this way a public speaker could be booed off the stage, as it were.

Walmart is probably the closest thing we Americans have nowadays to a physical public meeting place. The next time you are at a Walmart, try this experiment: stand up on an empty packing crate, try speaking your mind to fellow shoppers, and see what happens. I’m guessing your behavior won’t be tolerated for very long. You see, Walmart has bought the property where the public square once was. And was given a tax subsidy to do so.

Facebook is the virtual equivalent of the public square. The only difference between the public square and Facebook is that a corporation decides who your message goes to and what you are permitted to say. It is like a public square where Mark Zuckerberg rents out megaphones to those who can afford them and shouts into a megaphone at those who are not approved by Facebook.

There are other places you can go to speak of course, places where mega-corporations are not deciding who will be heard. But few people ever go there. Just as the public land has been mostly bought up, so too are the prime internet hotspots controlled by corporations that have interests in spreading corporate narrative. You still have freedom, it just doesn’t mean much anymore.

The authors of the Bill Of Rights sought to protect our freedom of speech. The fact that the First Amendment specifically states that it protects our freedom of speech from government and not corporations is because our Founding Fathers could not have imagined the kind of power that corporations now wield in our society. In fact, they were rather careful not to give undue power to corporations in the first place. The power that exists now in the hands of corporations is beyond anything our Founding Fathers would have dreamed of. Nowhere in the U.S. Constitution does it state that the rights of corporations were paramount in the minds of those who wrote it. Clearly, clearly, they were concerned with the rights of individuals.

To say corporations have the right to silence you is to say the rights of corporations supersede the rights of individuals. Which is to say that the rights of capital supersedes human rights. As it now stands, you have the right to the pursuit of happiness, so long as your happiness does not conflict with the interests of corporations. Should your pursuit of happiness be in opposition to the pursuit of profit of a corporation, even a corporation that does not pay any taxes, guess whose interests are going to win out?

It’s pretty self-evident that corporate interests would want to control the means of information dissemination, isn’t it? For the same reason they spend billions of dollars on advertising, it is in their best interest to control what information we receive. Jeff Bezos didn’t buy The Washington Post because he saw newspapers as a growing market. While Facebook is a different situation, it is still in the best interests of corporations and those who most profit from them to insure social media is in the hands of billionaires, because to be in the hands of billionaires is to be under the control of billionaires.

We need democratic media. If we do not have that then we cannot pretend to have democracy. It might seem somewhat paradoxical to state that if we want open and democratic media we have to speak up for it, but it is perhaps more clearly understood if it is stated that should we neglect to demand our rights, our rights will surely be taken from us. 

Corporations DO respond to the people. But they do so in the same way wolves responds to people, because their interests are the same. They are by nature predators, and they will take everything they can from you. If you are not vigilant, they will sneak up while you are not looking and take from you everything they can. Do not delude yourself on this essential point. The only difference between a wolf and a corporation is wolves do not seek to control the means of communication.

Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.