My dilemma with social media broadcasting is that there are things I care about and actions that I wholeheartedly detest, but there are ZERO people I hate. So my approach to problem solving is, "I think you're being an arsehole, so let's talk about it over a cup of tea."
-
Pokaż ten wątek
-
Because the percentage of genuine arseholes is very low; mostly it's self-betrayal, bad information, and spiritual laziness (a.k.a. no pressing circumstances and convenience of the status quo that breeds hubris).
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 0 polubionychPokaż ten wątek -
But on social media (and sometimes in life), the format of "I don't like what you did but I respect you as a human being" falls flat.
0 odpowiedzi 0 podanych dalej 0 polubionychPokaż ten wątek -
Ten tweet jest niedostępny.
-
Yes, I used them in the same sentence because the difference is in the target audience and in the definition of the enemy; but on the receiving end of any fear mongering, there are live human beings who pay the price. And that is my point. But pays, and it is undeniable.
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 0 polubionychPokaż ten wątek -
Most people are a lot more nuanced and loving if you talk to them one on one, when they don't feel like they need to "brand" themselves. And it is a tragedy of our culture. Because solutions are actually closer than we think. But circumstances keep distracting us from nuance.
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 0 polubionychPokaż ten wątek
The ultimate tragedy is that the culture strongly encourages us to act not like complex and subjective humans — but like viruses, carriers of very narrowly defined "ideas." After repeating the same thing a thousand times, we give ourselves a partial lobotomy. And pass the virus.
Wydaje się, że ładowanie zajmuje dużo czasu.
Twitter jest przeciążony lub wystąpił chwilowy problem. Spróbuj ponownie lub sprawdź status Twittera, aby uzyskać więcej informacji.