Social Media Rant

Creepily, Facebook just asked me if I think they’re making the world a better place. So I opted to go full rant in my response, and let it all hang out. Not because they’ll give a shit, but catharsis maybe?

I’m unsure what social media platforms are supposed to be at this stage. As a medium to interact and engage with friends, facebook isn’t that great anymore. As such it’s now more of a platform to market oneself and one’s products. However, in this regard Facebook has failed somewhat too, with the prioritization of big business and big budgets. It is no longer as effective as a small entrepreneur to market products, as big business can essentially always pay more for their products to bombard customers in every corner of the web.

This was not the case before, where small entrepreneurs used to stand a chance of having their products appear equally next to big business if people liked the product. This in essence defeats the previous open opportunity the internet and social media used to represent. It is all but monopolized now.

Monopolies breed inefficiency, laxity, and cut out innovation in favour of their own products and services, which often times are archaic, overpriced, and make use of excess slave labour. This is one way Facebook may not be making the world a better place.

Secondly, Facebook’s algorithms seem to place quantity over quality. Therefore, poorly researched and written fake news articles are more likely to become popular, despite them not even being factual. This may be a technical programming issue, however many minority activist, and intellectual groups view this as an active assault on intellectualism and minority views, with Facebook curating information in favour of privilege (again, returning to point one where he/she who pays most, appears most) .Thus Facebook could be seen to be promoting non-intellectualism, and poor quality literature.

On the plus side, Facebook is a great place to network with those in your field if you’re an introvert. Similarly, with some meticulous curating, socializing can be bearable on Facebook, and keep one in contact with those who are far away. Also, with much sifting and effort, one can occasionally use Facebook to find, and/or organize events, but the above caveats still apply.

 

Advertisements

On The Nature of History, Heritage, and Dicknanigans

Recently, the unstoppably evil sociopathic force that is Jacob Zuma, has had himself memorialized twice, to the applause of faux black excellence, and overblown struggle credentials.

Observing Zuma and his new brand of ANC, recent discussions of history and heritage come to mind. Much like their fore bearers, The National Party (who wrote the book on thumb sucking a new history for political gain) the ‘ANC’, and Zuma, are quite clearly trying to rewrite a contemporary South African history that paints them in a flattering light.

As absurd and depraved as these moves are, they present a great opportunity to reflect on why heritage and history must consistently be brought up, discussed, pondered, reformed, and occasionally re-written in light of new information. An ongoing process that should continue forever. Maybe future African generations will lead #ZumaMustFall movements (wait…hang on…) and opt to erect statues of African leaders with more integrity?

Anyway, many a white conservative (along with their ever annoying sloth shaped familiars, the neo-liberal pacifist) wonder why persons of colour of are so concerned with constantly re-evaluating the popular history, that they were so often haphazardly written out of. Well, here we find an example the white conservative may be able to fathom more easily.

The current corrupt ANC’s attempts at repainting themselves as the “real struggle heroes”, the “returners of land”, and the “slayers of white monopoly capital”, are pretty much the reasons why. Recent ANC history, compared to what the ANC used to be, is embarrassing the say the least. What the current ANC is doing, in how it chooses to socially re-construct South African (and African history) is nothing new, or out of the ordinary. It is pretty much what white supremacists did when they arbitrarily decided that white is right, and thumb sucked a history to go along with it.
Furthermore, Zuma is also illustrating the matter of rich, tasteless, powerful men, memorializing themselves, based on the narratives they decide. Again, a common colonial strategy, that Zuma has shown such a penchant for perpetuating. The man seems to be on a crusade to be the perfect case study for what Fanon and Mamdani have tried to tell us about colonial hangovers. Also, spoiler alert #MugabeDidItFirst.

So how to memorialise the contemporary ANC, and their Supreme Leader Jacob “The Teflon Don” Zuma. Well, definitely no rape charges, avoid any mention of state capture, definitely don’t mention corruption charges. Keep it Disney; just good ol’ stories of ‘the struggle’ blah blah. Probably throw something in there about radical economic transformation, white monopoly capital, and oh, those pesky ‘clever blacks’.

Is this ringing a bell?

The list goes on.

So, I’m sort of hoping this example might resonate more with white conservatives as it fits their general ignorant view that persons of colour are incapable of doing anything right.  Hopefully they can but extend their brains a bit, reflect, realise that many of their white heroes are no better than Zuma, and constructed a bullshit history of their own too? Probably not.

I’m also hoping persons of colour aren’t falling for the same old Dicknanigans that many of our white counterparts have fallen for throughout history, as the ANC is going full-retard with reconstructing their contemporary image. Probably more likely?

Meh, think I’ll just watch Dicknanigans again, and pretend none of this is happening.