Complex issues can't be tackled nor resolved by simply taking a side.
One is not fully functioning in a decentralized environment if their first instinct is to attempt to change everything for everyone the moment they have a problem. Complaining incessantly and acting like the manager is supposed to come and intervene when there is no manager leads nowhere, of course. Society seems wired to only know that way of living. The one in charge is supposed to do everything and the people are to sit and wait for it to happen, is how the brain works, and it'll be difficult for people to cut ties with that wiring then begin to realize if they don't like something they can simply take action, bend and shape the world around them without asking for permission or waiting to be given the go ahead.
A perfect example of a dysfunctional thought process in a decentralized world has been taking place almost nonstop lately. Some would say their covid material is under fire so therefore Hive is censored, for instance, rather than being more realistic and thinking it seems my material is under fire so therefore I'll create a platform dedicated to that material and nobody can stop me, because Hive is not censored. Then when some add another layer of irrational thought processing and include this idea of the actions of a few must speak for everyone, the problem can only persist, since those not responsible are now responsible for fixing something they did not break and those wanting change are doing nothing but yapping.
People talk about the differences between web 2.0 and web 3.0. Web 2.0 helped shape society as it is today. That's society 2.0. And I think it'll take several years before society can learn to take advantage of society 3.0. The technology and opportunities will shift but many minds will stay behind in the old world. That can already be observed and studied on this platform as it develops. Applying old world politics to a decentralized environment is akin to using a rock to pound nails. Apply force and the tool simply shatters. Meanwhile a far superior tool is sitting on the shelf still in the box, but the people fear it, and it didn't come with instructions. Freedom to act.
It is true that taking the freedom to think and act without asking permission is a way of not giving up power over oneself to others. This may mean that you are considered a criminal, either because of laws that have been passed out there or because of rules that are considered set in a system. Acting freely also means exposing oneself to risk and being able to expect some consequences. In order not to completely deprive oneself of one's ability to act, I think it is wise not to get involved in "me against the others" matters.
I admit that it takes some courage and self-knowledge to practise such free action and not ask for permission or demand a solution coming from above. However, the habit is deeply ingrained, I would think and agree with you. I find it a difficult task to always know and recognise where and how I can walk the tightrope without falling. There are situations in life where I am weak and others where I am not.
A situation stands and falls with how much trust I have in myself and my fellow human beings and where it is my mistrust and anger that wins.
Besides what you call yapping, there are also provocations and other forms of expression (despair, sadness), and so on. All this may be merged in my perception and I may dismiss it as "nonsense". I leave the space for my own error here and would conclude by saying that everyone probably takes on a certain role that involves an important learning experience just for their life situation. I would not want to deny anyone the potential to develop in this because, for example, someone takes up a position that is clearly visible to the outside world or, for my part, try to react to this person with too much pressure.
One could see all this struggle as a birthing act. The debates, the fights, the clashing encounters. I am certain, all involved will take some learning out if it.
I like your tool analogy, speaking in pictures says it often better.
Hmmm.
You're one of the wise ones. Thanks for putting it on display.
Yapping. I used that term far too loosely. I'm a lazy writer in the comment section and use far too much slang. I literally meant, talking.
And yes, as I even stated somewhere else in the comments here, all this chaos is a blessing in disguise. Several positives can be pulled from even just one negative. Folks were acting far too defeated and that for me is frustrating to watch.
So here's one of many soon to be opportunities for those interested. Straight up handed to them. Are they able to move past the issues now and embrace this change, while improving upon it and acting to make it successful, or will the potential be squandered while the people remain glued to their problems... ?
For instance in this case of the covid content. The delivery is partially dependent on this concept of being censored. Can it be as effective and can the story be told the same way now, if it's no longer "censored"... ?
I suspect that element will remain, even though there are plenty of opportunities to simply act, embrace the tools we have here to their full potential, and rip the mask off. It boils down now to being a choice whether or not those wishing to express those views want it to be censored, or not. Taking that element away means the story has to be told a different way. That'll be interesting to see especially these days as other platforms including what's considered 'mainstream' have been slowly opening the doors and letting more opinions in without shutting them down. These folks locally here might be late to the party.
That's a damn good question. An out of the box thinking that I very much welcome because it opens up a completely different, especially questioning, perspective.
I was at a birthday party the day before yesterday and people were using code in their addressing each other. For instance, I was asked if I was "a Monday or Sunday walker". Translated, this means whether I go to the demonstrations. They wanted to know right away whether I was a friend or a foe. I said, "neither". This behaviour of falling with the door into the house and checking strangers to see if they belong to the right camp is, in my perception, mistrust.
Instead of giving each other the opportunity to get to know each other informally, radical minds in particular seem unable to let go for once and leave their worries at home.
Underneath, one senses their actual disinterest in wanting to get to know the person they spontaneously meet. The whole thing has driven people so crazy that from a certain point on they no longer dare to leave their initially adopted identity. That's a difficult way to go, because it tempts people to close doors and burn bridges. Someone who sees himself surrounded only by enemies misses moments when this is not the case.
I can hardly really estimate the whole situation from my point of view. My own scope of action is so limited that it is difficult for me to make a judgement. What seems clear is that the forces are at work and that there are counter-forces. To what extent the fears I personally harbour will come true remains to be seen.
There is no such thing as "being late to the party" in my world view. People are on a very broad spectrum of self-realisation and finding a common point in time where something has become "generally realised" is an impossibility. That moment may come when no one is talking about the hot topic any more and it fades from the burning glass of attention. Named forces try to fix (in the sense of solidify it in peoples lives as a forever ongoing theme) the issue in time and that causes despair on many levels.
All I can do is prioritise my respect for someone and where I fail or am in danger of failing to do so, it is better (for me) to remain silent.
Another very good point. I share your frustration about this.
I've had so much trouble describing what you so easily placed into words just now.
Standing in the middle and observing is one of the loneliest places on the planet these days. Taking it all in, rather than, half. It's like being surrounded by walls. The doors are locked. Both sides looking at you through the windows only see you standing in the other room with, them.
Both sides are loud, but there is not a peep coming from the middle. And if it does try to make a sound it quickly gets drowned out by all the noise coming from the neighbors.
It's eerie.
Thank you, it's soothing to hear similarities in perceptions.
For me, the room with the walls and windows is a metaphor for my prison. Outside this prison cell, life goes on and other issues and worries and moments of happiness can be found, which, because they exist in complete ignorance of the room, have their nevertheless existing reality.
The "middle of society" has never been particularly interested in depth, and perhaps that is just as well... This middle therefore seems to me at times like hell and heaven in equal measure.
Loneliness gives me feelings of despair and isolation just as it offers me the most beautiful ideas for authentic artistic creation. Sometimes, when things are going well, it awakens the ever-laughing mischief.
I wish you merry Christmas from the far and hope, you'll spend it in the midst of some love and trust.
gonna be honest I didn't read everybody's things or know of sides other than I've been here , O.G. bigtime and then just ghost out cause of whatever is going on half the time, I hope people can take the crap and instead of I guess polishing a turd (wrote a post on it and usually get all deep thought)
anyhow, hope olive branches get passed and not sure what happened and honestly don't have time for being a sad chick BUT the web 3.0 is scary, people schooling on ZOOM giving unfettered internet access at times to kids but banning books. that's the end of my rant and some days I hope half the "anti-social sites" stop screwing with us. O.o