what I think

 According to the internet a blog is either written by an individual or a small group and updated regularly. It is usually a focused thing, concerning a single topic. The truth is there are as many blogs as there are topics. When I begin mine I thought I would focus on my memories and my opinions. It was a conscious choice figuring my memories could also be someone else's opinion and vice versa. But I think my blog may have morphed into a conversation with the world, although the world seldom answers. So I suppose it would be fair to say my blog is more an opportunity to just speak, uninterrupted. A real conversation requires the exchange of ideas, a discourse as it were. I have discovered however that with social media that is often just not possible. Turns out personal interaction requires people to be present, in person. Well, who would have thought?

 I have found that my unconscious thoughts are often brought into the light through my writing. Sometimes I am surprised at what comes out. Well it has been said if you want to know what you think, write. Write what you know is the advice from the experts. The issue is what I know and you know may be different things altogether, even when discussing the same topic. Absolutes are rare. They do exist however. Universal truths are out there waiting for you to discover them. The best example I can think of is the golden rule. That is an absolute. I also find I repeat myself. I look at that as a good thing, as it shows I'm not indecisive. Yes it can bore the readers but it shows that I have decided, made a decision, made my choice. And that is something I firmly believe we all need to do. I believe in order to have a stable life you have to have a stable foundation. You can't continually change your mind about things and expect to be happy. 

 There is a bit of vanity involved with all of that as well. First I assume that people reading my blogs remember my blogs and my opinions. In my experience folks tend to remember more that they don't agree with than anything else. I think that may be a defense mechanism, it pays to know your enemies! For some folks anyone that doesn't agree with them are their enemy. That is certainly the attitude I see on social media. We are expected to pick sides in every discussion. The problem lies in defining a discussion and separating that from a debate. It isn't possible to disagree with each other without one of you being wrong. That being understood goes a long way in having a discussion. It doesn't mean you hate the other person, it means you don't agree with their conclusion based on your experience. 

 I was recently blocked from posting any comments on Facebook. My opinion was not allowed. That was because I violated their "community" standards. My fault as they provide you with those community standards, all you have to do is read the agreement. By using the platform I agree to the terms. Okay, that's fair enough. It does feel like I am being censored, my speech restricted. Well that's because it is. I agreed to it though. So the community standard is basically you can only say what they agree with. They can change, alter, or modify that at any time. Just like me, they can change their mind. And all of that is fine when it comes to using Facebook or any other social network. As I said it is their ball, they can take it and go home anytime they want to. 

 It is a bit concerning when the "government" begins to monitor and regulate social media. That is taking place as I write this blog. Congressional hearings are taking place. The Senate is grilling Facebook, the owner of instagram, over the possible effects it may have on teenagers and children. They are accusing Facebook of knowingly manipulating the children. Hmm, sounds like advertising to me. Didn't the government ban advertising cigarettes on television for that reason? That happened back in 1970 and in 1986 smokeless tobacco was banned as well. That was for the health of the nation. Then in 1997 it was decided that the drug companies could advertise their products. Wonder whose lobbyists had the most influence? But the government decided what could and could not be said on that platform. All I'm saying here is be careful what you ask for. Do we really want the government deciding what can be read? That's what this is all about, postings. What is a posting? Someone expressing their opinion is the short answer to that. Isn't censoring postings the same as censoring books? Both actions block the dissemination of ideas and opinions. 

 Well, all of this is just what I think. Take it and do with it as you please. It's free! It's one of the few free things in this world. Most everything else comes with a price. Even Facebook comes with a price, agreement. You have to agree with them or just be silent. That's nothing new to me, I heard that a lot growing up. If you don't have anything nice to say don't say anything at all. LOL. I wasn't listening though. I just keep on saying what I think.