Sometimes I simply don't understand people. Why would anyone deny covid-19 is a serious health risk for millions of people and why would people deny the fact climate change is a real and dangerous thing, mainly caused by us, people?
Do people need to get ill themselves or lose a loved one to covid before they understand their favourite populist or information channel is wrong?
Do people really need to see their house destroyed before they realise climate change is real and the cause of more floods, draughts and tornadoes?
Apparently so because a lot of people are stupid.
If you don't want to believe me or actial scientists in stead of a random stranger who claims she (it's often women who share fake news) has done her 'own' research and 'proofs' her 'own' theory that just happens to float around in the exact same words on thousands of other social media accounts, perhaps you could listen to Elon Musk:
'Yes, but I have a good immune system and can combat all diseases with ease!' 1. That's a very selfish thought because maybe someone that you infect (like you grandmother or a co-worker) might not have such an amazing immune system as you have. 2. If you have such great trust in your immune system, why are you so mortally afraid of a vaccin or of wearing a facemask? 3. Why are you at least as stupid as Herman Cain? Anyone could get seriously ill or even die from the virus. And no, it's not 'just a simple flu.' Only simple people think it is.
In a true democracy politicians are chosen because of their skills and expertise. Right? Yeah. That would be nice but simply is not true. Well, not always. The American political system is an example of where this is not the case. Sarah Huckabee Sanders will most likely become the next governor of Arkansas. Because her father was governor Mike Huckabee. So America is back to the old system where a few families rule. Remember the Bush family? Two presidents and a governor. Hillary Clinton was close to follow in her husband's Bill's footsteps as president.
Politicians running for important seats put a lot of money and effort in obtaining that seat. They have extensive networks of 'friends' who sponsor them in exchange for financial or social advantages. Mostly financial: you give a candidate a million dollars campaign money and he or she - when 'elected' - makes sure you get a government contract or some tax deal that's worth more than a million.
That system has nothing to do with democracy but everything with favoritism. In Dutch 'vriendjespolitiek', 'little friends politics'.
People don't choose a politician because of is or her ideas and how that person is planning to implement those ideas. They choose the candidate with the most money/the best network/the best public relations campaign. And because they already know someone. The people of Arkansas saw Sarah Sanders often on television when she worked as a spokesperson for President Donald Trump.
Politicians and other marketeers know that people tend to trust someone they have often seen more than someone who is a new face to them.
British politics is famous for its 'old boys network'. A lot of high ranking politicians just happen to come from the same college. 20 out of the 55 British Prime Ministers went to Eton. 90 out of the 360 Conservative members of Parliament made millions running other companies while only officially working as a politician. Geoffrey Cox only spoke to parliament in real life once. When he voted he did so online. From the Virgin Islands. And speaking of Britain: the people voted to leave the EU because they were tricked to do so by businessmen who literally paid politicians to go for a 'Brexit' because they didn't want to answer to new EU-rules on tax evasion(click).
Former Dutch Minister of Traffic Camiel Eurlings later gave KLM some extra landing rights as a member of EU-Parliament and by pure coincidence landed himself a nice job when he stepped down as a politician. He became president of Royal KLM Airlines. The Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte used to work for Unilever.
The Philippines are ruled by either the Duterte or the Marcos family. People with a different last name hardly stand a chance te becoming president.
There are literally thousands of examples like above worldwide. And there's nothing we can do about it. Neither can the politicians who actually fight that system and actually do care more about the people than their own wallet, familie, friends and ego. And maybe we could think before next time we vote. Instead of voting for the politician with the best PR-manager we could ask him or her how he or she intents to keep the promises made in flyers and on Twitter. And then decide depending on their answers.
What are your thoughts on this? Do you live in an actual democracy or is your country ruled by a few families or networks of friends? Do you know of a country where most politicians are actually chosen by the people, based on their skills and expertise?
'The internet and - to be more precise - social media is a curse: only negative stuff and when you see something nice you feel like you're underachieving because people only share pictures and stories about how wonderful their lives are!'
I'm sorry for all the haters but that simply isn't true. First of all: it depends on your personal filters. If you only want to see bad news, that's all the algorithms will show you. If you only look at pictures of smiling friends, that's all you get to see.
Social media is not much different from real life: when was the last time you ran into an old friend and he or she said: 'I'm in a bit of a pickle, could you loan me a hundred bucks?' in stead of: 'I'm doing great, really. All's fine! You?'
Did you answer honestly that you're in a terrible divorce, your mother just died and you lost your job six months ago? No. You 'd probably say something like: 'I'm a happy single, won't listen to my mother anymore and decided to stop working for a while to enjoy life while I can.'
It's the same when people have encounters on social media. When someone does post something like 'I hate my life because chemo sucks, I lost my sense of taste, can't enjoy sex anymore. The only thing preventing me from wanting to die is wanting to see my ex die first.' we often don't know how to respond. Just like in real life.
But just like real life the internet too is full of wondrous, hopeful, funny, inspiring, information that puts a smile on our faces.
Wrinkle the Duck enjoyed people (and who knows how many ducks were watching, cheering on one of their kind?) by participating in the marathon of New York.
And how about this family that teaches people through TikTok about the do's and don't when interacting with a deaf child?
And here's one badass young lady you might see at the Olympics one day:
Paige Tobin knows how to handle a board!
~
Strangely enough there are people out there who are apparently só dissapointed in life they can't help themselves and just have to make negative comments:
When I reacted to this clip of Paige (click) stating how cute and badass I find young Paige and noted a young man showing his respect for her and her moves by helping her out of the skating pit, a lady just had to type: 'No, she is nog being helped. How dare you make this about a man again?' Or words in that order.
To me it looks like said responder doesn't know that being a feminist is not about hating men showing their appreciation for women.
The lady clean out stated the young man was not helping his young co-skater. In my humble opionion she was either lying (To make a point? Which point could that be?) or didn't watch the clip until the end but refused to admit that she didn't because she didn't want to be called out as someone who has formed an opinion before looking at the straight facts.
What do you think? Did the young man in this clip (click) help Paige? Did he do so out of respect and camaraderie or to show the world that in his opinion women can't do anything without the help of men?
