The great British Brexit robbery: how our democracy was hijacked by Carole Cadwalladr
“We are in the midst of a massive land grab for power by billionaires via our data. Data which is being silently amassed, harvested and stored. Whoever owns this data owns the future.”
Read this. One of the most important pieces of journalism on #SurveillanceCapitalism this year.
... We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.“ — John Swinton, Chief of Staff New York Times at New York Press Club, 1953
ID: 03MAY2017b / ~fin~
“There is no such thing, at this date of the world’s history, in America, as an independent press. The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread.
The more quotes from Bob Ross I read, the more I feel like deep inside throughout his career Bob was just bottling up this perhaps huge amount of rage, channeling it into happy thoughts and peaceful paintings and helping people feel more confident of each their attempts at art...
I am also an un/under-educated Prole, destined I believe to be encumbered with a ceaseless desire and drive to learn more by those willing to patiently look beyond my rebellious nature - and graciously accept the same encumbering load along the way.
“The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.”
― Albert Camus
ID: 20170429l / ~ fin ? ~
Is it still then worth the time and effort to travel upstream against the barriers to what you or I might interpret as "open communication"?
I don't know.
I am just a Prole, and a rebellious one by my very nature. I strive, quite unsuccessfully some/most days - to survive by a "Live and Let Live" #modusoperandi
This position has again been an admitted and confirmed bias of my own, after watching and reading some rather interesting #tootstorms - as well as corresponding articles regarding how Mastodon and the Fediverse has evolved.
My dilemma however still centers around how differences of opinion or an 'ability' to interpret what is presented quickly gravitate to rhetorical badgering and baiting (or worse).
Gresham's Law of Perceived Conversational Bias [Codified]:
"Insensitive, presumptive, and condescending conversation drives out sensitive, considerate, and supportive conversation." (thanks @dredmorbius )
Since I began wayfaring these Mastodonian Plains, it seems my own anecdotal observation is again, that "Shouting is easy, communicating is a challenge, and the economics (or economic incentive) behind it all is can be infuriatingly complicated."
"I feel no need to 'win' by some measure any particular interaction." - @dredmorbius
This succinct statement echoes my own choice and significant factor in vacating most "social hamster-wheels." It has also fueled some "pragmatic skepticism" regarding most socialized digital venues and structures of power that always seem to evolve.
It is an awareness and heightened sensitivity that commentary can be presented dialectically, rhetorically, as well as pedantically (and perhaps in other forms as well; i.e. Metaphorically?).
SO, if "bad X drives out good" I am faced with "rethink[ing] what's possible" while my blank face is reflecting the uncertainty of what may be achievable, or accepting with great pain - what just might be impossible.
A reply I rarely but appreciatively receive is a reminder, quite politely, that "comments ... are very highly appreciated." This seemingly paradoxical statement has bothered me for days/months, as I returned to the safety of my closed door or slunk back to the dark recesses of my cave.
"But why are you doing this Prole?", is the question face in the darkness and the answer, or at least a direction, may be on the horizon - IF I am willing to stick my head back outside.
All of these experiences return me to a 'conversation' elsewhere:
"I am [now] more restrictive in my online engagement. NOT to hide, but due to an ever increasing awareness that I protect my expressions and opinions and experiences because of their rarity and value. This then is a commodity that I happily will share with close friends, confidants, family, and others of my choosing. But I do have limits - which I can push against - but generally with a layer of self-restraint."
I have never really considered myself to be in opposition of technological evolution or advancement. Yet I have willingly begun returning to "Ye Olde Repositories of Informative Data Dissemination" - whether found in the Brick-n-Mortar temples (Libraries), or Communities of 'quiet' continuous publication (Newspapers) - to name a few. These 'places' provide a layer of civility not lost in the noise of everything else (or everyone else).
And with each passing day, alongside each notation that streams across my screens - I admittedly struggle with what I read, knowing full well the experiential journey I have had thus far is one riddled with potholes; barriers (of my own and other's making) and a notable decrease in civility (or, as noted, humility).
And almost immediately, the following observation comes to mind:
"Publishing is the act of making available an idea or work to the public. And in doing so, the considered interests and responses of that public are fair game...", followed quickly with, "That public has its own set of issues and concerns. Often a problem it is trying to solve, and for which it's seeking either tools or guidance."