WordPress will not allow me to like the website of the Alchemist because I am not on Facebook.
Repeatedly, we wonder what on earth these web engine and website people think they are doing, since these things are neither in their interest nor in ours. There could be class action lawsuits where ever content and association, communication and enterprise are inhibited in the shortsighted concern with micro-marketing. Again, I live in a shed, and I know these things?
We suggest that there be designed, and the Federal government protect, an honorable social media provider, and that the Christians, without taking this over, support it financially. The alternative is not some impractical pay up front system, the alternative is moderate advertising that does not prostitute us, but that we can trust enough to do business, and perhaps keep on when children are in the room. Do you trust that your screen is not literally watching you? And what of the ways you have not even thought of yet? We do not exchange our liberty for the privilege of providing content for advertisers. The purpose of government is to secure natural rights.
Facebook is orchestrating traffic to websites. Why do we not promote a social media website that does not have the flaws that now are becoming obvious? National security, which may well be at stake, will surely be enhanced, if only by the surge of liberty to the GNP. Why do we not prohibit and criminalize spying and controlling traffic, and information brokering, whenever these billion dollar but shortsighted interests walk right over the liberties our forefathers gave their lives to secure?
Our nation is in decline, it is said, and expected to fall from its position of world prominence. We can bash our heads against the causes, but we do it alone. No one cares. That is what decline is. Call Congress? The people have elected a Congress afraid to oppose the big powers and interests, and it was theirs to do so. Sue them? Like payola in the recording industry, even if one should avoid every impertinent technicality and win a single case by devoting ones life and sanity to the cause, nothing will change. That is what decline is. We do not wake up until it is too late. That is what is in the cards. Facebook has x billion dollars, and so their lobbyists will prevail. They have painted a picture in which information brokering and spying on people is called free enterprise, and any attempt to abolish our self destruction is “regulation,” which we know we do not want, and of which our government usually proves incapable. Does Mr. Zuckerberg not see that his little empire depends the liberty provided by America, and that the first tyrant who takes us over will also have him? And does everyone not see that it will not be pretty, but sudden and unopposable once it occurs? Where are the rich men who can see? One said to the poor man, “If your so smart, why are you not rich?” The poor man answered, “if your so rich, why are you not smart?” It is a matter of luck, or accident, if one with wealth or influence is not also motivated by the same narrow, shortsighted aims by which the majority are moved. Do they all think they will themselves be the tyrant, so they have nothing to fear? Where is the Billionaire who can both see and care? Why do we not make something of our lives, and put an end to these things? We do not have enough money yet? Are the rich not tired of funding cockroach studies?
I want to know who taught Mr. Zuckerberg American Government at Harvard. Perhaps he left his dorm room for his entrepeneureal career before he had to take this class. He is trumpeting entrepreneurism and technology at a Hackers convention this week. Again, jobs and technology are the only goals of education that are admissible publicly. Again, ask our president or our governor. The middle class is disappearing, meanwhile, and class tension reappearing. Perhaps this is because the rich, and the new internet billionaires, are orchestrating the conditions, leaving the poor to play a rigged game, as will soon become apparent. I heard a man with a new book, The Age of Acquiescence, Steve Frasier, talking about the old days when people would “take to the streets,” as in the union violence and the race violence of the past of America. Not once did he suggest that we vote for representatives that are resolved to do something about these things, inform them of our concerns, or run for these offices ourselves.
The Bill of Rights must take over the internet, or be applied to it, in order to secure the same prosperity which this secured in the visible world. The alternative, again, is not pretty. The alternative may be world wide tyranny. That is why we must seek the cure of free government in more free government.
You might like this blog, but it is most likely that Facebook will not allow this. WordPress will want some information from you that they can use, and they think this information brokering is to their big advantage. So, because no one trusts the internet with information, communication is inhibited, and what might have been a bright new day as a result of this technology will be ruined. The tragedy is typically human. Facebook will have to live in the world that remains.
I have published an entire book, and nearly starved to death when I needed to sell about twenty copies to survive the winter. I am only gradually discovering the extent to which the monopolies on publication and social interaction are at fault in particular and in detail. But I have not paid them yet! Do they not own me? Turn to government and political process? Do they not also own them?
Again, the people are like Dorothy: We would only have to click our heels. Congress would do our bidding, but we will not. The powers know that the people can be orchestrated. Go, your probably missing American Idol. And who want to listen to anything negative?