Atheists were a fringe group, then came the internet and atheists were able to meet other atheists from around the world and share their ideas on a much wider scale than ever before, and this forum is an excellent example. Before I found this forum, there wasn’t a way for me to easily share my atheistic thoughts, then I came here and found a community of atheists where we could freely and easily express ourselves, and the catharsis was psychologically and intellectually relieving.
Shortly after arriving here I read an article about how the internet saved the Latin language from oblivion in the same way, as the few-and-far-between Latin language lovers were brought together through the internet to save the language.
Sadly, the same has gone for lousy ideas, too. Ideas which, in my opinion, should remain in the fringe, but the internet has brought the holders of fringe ideas together and amplified their voices, and the biggest current example of this are the anti-vax dill weeds. Without the internet anti-vax was a whacked cult of a barely significant number, but with the internet they have increased their numbers dramatically, and based on the vaccination rates for COVID-19, their numbers are roughly >35% of the US population.
The internet saves. It gives a microphone to one person who can rally those who feel the same and make their voice much stronger in a world-wide market place of ideas, and I have a feeling it will be a while before we get used to the new supermarket of ideas.
Through all the shake ups and take downs and flare ups and melt downs we’re all in this together. A considerable amount of time and energy here might as well be spent focusing on what we are bringing to the table. Instead of frivolous nonsense that takes the place for granted.
We are living in tumultuous times. Full of over reactions and under reactions where language is constantly being scrutinized. Okay. Are we able to pour a little cold water on whatever is fuelling all the resentment enough to have conversations about it beyond a one swipe gripe?
Recently a lot of attention is brought to articles illustrating the sensitivity of one point of view threatening to curtail the speech of another. In the absence of nuance. Propaganda isn’t something you get to decide is propaganda based on whether or not you agree with it. It’s a rusing.
The memorable break downs would not be described by observers the way they’d be described by the ones to whom it was happening. Sending many a patron tripping back into religion, I suspect. A shorter drive for those with one foot firmly planted in both worlds all along. Just in case.
I think if you make assertions you should be willing to back them up. And take the repercussions. In general.
It’s not the end of the world to have a difference of opinion. When that’s all it is. There’s no need to make assumptions about a patrons politics or gullibility or hormones. Agree to disagree without attributing emotional reactions to everything. You may come off like a person projecting.
Bill Maher had heavyweights Steve Martin and Martin Short on his show last night. Legendary funny men. He could’ve asked them anything. Instead…he moaned about cancel culture…again. The answer to whining…is more whining?
Telling the truth about an oncoming trainwreck can help prevent some foreseeable crashes.
Another comment referred to McCarthy’s quip about hitting Pelosi with a gavel. Sure, one could construe that as an off the cuff joke. Except it follows a violent insurrection at the Capitol where folks were literally calling for her head. Shining a light on the ever present Death Threat Culture.
I think when people use their platform to complain about losing their platform they’ve taken their eye off the ball. And they’re wasting light.