In the very earliest days of our country, we communicated by newspapers. Private citizens would publish papers and then deliver them, often by horseback, to the rest of the country.
If those private citizens didn't want to tell the truth, or if they wanted to hide something, they did.
As time went on, these newspapers turned into the primary method of getting your political message out. Hence, many newspapers, to this day, have the words "Republican" or "Democrat" in them. Why? Because they were literally operations run for political ends.
As the 1900s started rolling in, radio shows and TV shows started to take off. Guess what the parties did? They started to influence and control TV. Unfortunately, the democrats won that war. It wasn't until Rush Limbaugh in the 90s that we even had any sort of pro-republican message on any mass media.
The internet was democratic, at least in the beginning, back when people knew what IP addresses actually where and could look up gopher or HTTP pages without having to use DNS. Nowadays, people access the internet through their smartphones, and it is strictly controlled by the hardware and software companies that control the devices -- or rather, control the consumers of those devices.
And which party do those companies side with?
Communication isn't ever free. Either you learn how to communicate using modern technology, and you spend the time and effort to do so, or you rely on more primitive means of communication.
Unless you are some sort of full-stack developer with plenty of free time on your hands, you aren't going to begin to compete with Facebook and Google and Apple and Amazon. And even then, you know that if you want to build a website that works, it's going to take thousands of dollars renting servers -- servers owned by Amazon or some other company, which can easily pull the plug on your entire operation.
The internet is just modern newspapers. Either you own a printing press and know how to publish thousands of copies of leaflets in a matter of hours, or you rely on talking to your neighbors.
Talk to your neighbors.
IF you have free time and you'd like to play the internet game, remember that you have to follow their rules and they will change the rules on you if you start to win.
Technology has always been a progressive idea, preceding modern times in the past as it happened with astronomy and Galileo and urbanization versus traditional village lifestyles. I had the chance to know a christian guy for many years who refused to get into a car because he thought it was immoral, it's the same thing with all old world versus new world progressive technology, the Amish tradition mindset.
Conservatives of any era will always choose traditional lifestyles over progressive ones, but that doesn't mean they have to. The difference is today progressives have even more progressive offshoots within their society, we know them as the sexual revolution pushing for a second revolution well under way today and of course the modernization of morals across many divisive topics. Those groups are clearly over-represented in respect to their actual population numbers. Studies say under 1-2% of the population actually practices LGBT, abortion, etc, while 40%+ support their privilege to do so.
A major point we completely miss is that the internet is not a political organization, people do not have to be political and are not required to speak about it. I'm reminded of how Reddit and the 5-cent army have to pay people to make it appear like the entire internet is anti-Trump and pro whatever it is they want them to be. It's difficult to be conservative online because we've been made to believe it's so, we're made to believe angry screeching blue haired fatties will doxx and make death threats if we say anything contrary to their views. Does that mean everyone is extremely liberal online? No, it means public spaces have been invaded by vocal and confrontational agitators online. On average you only see a "burst" of progressive anti-conservative sentiment online, an indicator that these people are mobilized artificially, not one at a time. I could go on for ages but I firmly believe the internet is not dominated by progressivism, it's merely flooded by it. If you've seen the twitter bots that always reply something negative to Trump's twitter feed every time he posts something it's the same basic concept, public spaces are where ultra progressive liberals congregate for maximum visibility. There's far more to this topic, but I'll leave it at that for time's sake. And yes, neighbors matter and friends will still listen to people over posts online.
I don't know where this idea that tech is "progressive" comes from. The entire idea of "progressive" is based on the fallacy that there is a forward direction to progress towards.
All of the major breakthroughs that made modern science a thing were done by devout conservative Christians intent on understanding the state of the universe.
I myself studied physics in part out of a devotion to God and with the intent to understand his mind and will. I pursued programming as a career for similar reasons. I'm about as far from a "progressive" as you can imagine and yet in my whole life I can count on one hand the people I've met with similar ability. And they were all more conservative than liberal.
It sounds like we're not on the same page here so let me explain my view. It is my belief that within the progressive movement, what we call radical liberals, there's a much more diverse spectrum of ideology than simply lefties. It's similar to how liberal minded folk broadly paint us as "far right wing" en masse. As you know we're far more diverse than that, with even more conservatives branching off into pro-abortion and pro-apostasy evangelicals. It is my belief that liberals share that diverse nature within their holistic group. I find three different tiers of liberalism exist: modernists, extremists and radicals. What I believe is that the radicals are the most vocal representation of their population despite consisting of the minority. There might be majority of passive liberals who remain silent as those radicals and extremists voice their concerns as the rest do not. The same principle applies to conservatives who remain passive, happy with their society as those who dissent encourage change without opposition.
I figure you've probably already seen this one but if you haven't it's a fantastic read on topic of progressive versus normal traits of society and how change occurs:
In few words, my point is that the minority foster change while the majority allow it. It doesn't mean everyone necessarily wants it, but that they will permit it, meaning they do not oppose it. In that context liberals favor societal change without limits whereas conservative types also do, except within their model of permissible behavior. As an example a liberal of any type is far more likely to accept rap as their preferred genre of music than conservatives. Many modern and classic churches still consider rock music to be evil, but this is based on leadership rather than the general population. The majority of young people I know do enjoy rock and some even gothic heavy metal despite it being classified as anathema. The realistic consensus and the perceived one do not match despite there being an agreement. It's somewhat of a societal paradox the word "majority" does not imply consensus, but rather an accord.
To return to my initial point, progressives passively view change without resistance, whereas conservatives allow such a thing only if it fits their norms. A great demonstration of this principle is how liberals are far more likely to allow their kids to have unrestricted access on their phones and some conservatives may not allow their children to have phones until middle or even high school. It's not necessarily that they're against phones themselves but the unknown, unpredictable, and uncontrollable situations that arise cannot be tolerated or accepted when they are beyond the parent's authority. Both are capable of engaging in tech culture, but traditional families know they will struggle far more with that interference in their lives than a liberal who thinks a psychologist can solve any problem their children have for them. It's very true liberals have far more struggles adapting to tech culture as families. Look at the divorce, suicide, depression, and mental illness rates of high-tech liberals compared to conservative families. Liberals are far more likely to accept progressive technology even if it harms their lives. Adult gender reveal parties immediately come to mind.
Here's what you're missing.
In the very earliest days of our country, we communicated by newspapers. Private citizens would publish papers and then deliver them, often by horseback, to the rest of the country.
If those private citizens didn't want to tell the truth, or if they wanted to hide something, they did.
As time went on, these newspapers turned into the primary method of getting your political message out. Hence, many newspapers, to this day, have the words "Republican" or "Democrat" in them. Why? Because they were literally operations run for political ends.
As the 1900s started rolling in, radio shows and TV shows started to take off. Guess what the parties did? They started to influence and control TV. Unfortunately, the democrats won that war. It wasn't until Rush Limbaugh in the 90s that we even had any sort of pro-republican message on any mass media.
The internet was democratic, at least in the beginning, back when people knew what IP addresses actually where and could look up gopher or HTTP pages without having to use DNS. Nowadays, people access the internet through their smartphones, and it is strictly controlled by the hardware and software companies that control the devices -- or rather, control the consumers of those devices.
And which party do those companies side with?
Communication isn't ever free. Either you learn how to communicate using modern technology, and you spend the time and effort to do so, or you rely on more primitive means of communication.
Unless you are some sort of full-stack developer with plenty of free time on your hands, you aren't going to begin to compete with Facebook and Google and Apple and Amazon. And even then, you know that if you want to build a website that works, it's going to take thousands of dollars renting servers -- servers owned by Amazon or some other company, which can easily pull the plug on your entire operation.
The internet is just modern newspapers. Either you own a printing press and know how to publish thousands of copies of leaflets in a matter of hours, or you rely on talking to your neighbors.
Talk to your neighbors.
IF you have free time and you'd like to play the internet game, remember that you have to follow their rules and they will change the rules on you if you start to win.
Technology has always been a progressive idea, preceding modern times in the past as it happened with astronomy and Galileo and urbanization versus traditional village lifestyles. I had the chance to know a christian guy for many years who refused to get into a car because he thought it was immoral, it's the same thing with all old world versus new world progressive technology, the Amish tradition mindset.
Conservatives of any era will always choose traditional lifestyles over progressive ones, but that doesn't mean they have to. The difference is today progressives have even more progressive offshoots within their society, we know them as the sexual revolution pushing for a second revolution well under way today and of course the modernization of morals across many divisive topics. Those groups are clearly over-represented in respect to their actual population numbers. Studies say under 1-2% of the population actually practices LGBT, abortion, etc, while 40%+ support their privilege to do so.
A major point we completely miss is that the internet is not a political organization, people do not have to be political and are not required to speak about it. I'm reminded of how Reddit and the 5-cent army have to pay people to make it appear like the entire internet is anti-Trump and pro whatever it is they want them to be. It's difficult to be conservative online because we've been made to believe it's so, we're made to believe angry screeching blue haired fatties will doxx and make death threats if we say anything contrary to their views. Does that mean everyone is extremely liberal online? No, it means public spaces have been invaded by vocal and confrontational agitators online. On average you only see a "burst" of progressive anti-conservative sentiment online, an indicator that these people are mobilized artificially, not one at a time. I could go on for ages but I firmly believe the internet is not dominated by progressivism, it's merely flooded by it. If you've seen the twitter bots that always reply something negative to Trump's twitter feed every time he posts something it's the same basic concept, public spaces are where ultra progressive liberals congregate for maximum visibility. There's far more to this topic, but I'll leave it at that for time's sake. And yes, neighbors matter and friends will still listen to people over posts online.
I don't know where this idea that tech is "progressive" comes from. The entire idea of "progressive" is based on the fallacy that there is a forward direction to progress towards.
All of the major breakthroughs that made modern science a thing were done by devout conservative Christians intent on understanding the state of the universe.
I myself studied physics in part out of a devotion to God and with the intent to understand his mind and will. I pursued programming as a career for similar reasons. I'm about as far from a "progressive" as you can imagine and yet in my whole life I can count on one hand the people I've met with similar ability. And they were all more conservative than liberal.
It sounds like we're not on the same page here so let me explain my view. It is my belief that within the progressive movement, what we call radical liberals, there's a much more diverse spectrum of ideology than simply lefties. It's similar to how liberal minded folk broadly paint us as "far right wing" en masse. As you know we're far more diverse than that, with even more conservatives branching off into pro-abortion and pro-apostasy evangelicals. It is my belief that liberals share that diverse nature within their holistic group. I find three different tiers of liberalism exist: modernists, extremists and radicals. What I believe is that the radicals are the most vocal representation of their population despite consisting of the minority. There might be majority of passive liberals who remain silent as those radicals and extremists voice their concerns as the rest do not. The same principle applies to conservatives who remain passive, happy with their society as those who dissent encourage change without opposition.
I figure you've probably already seen this one but if you haven't it's a fantastic read on topic of progressive versus normal traits of society and how change occurs:
https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15#.hr22nda85
In few words, my point is that the minority foster change while the majority allow it. It doesn't mean everyone necessarily wants it, but that they will permit it, meaning they do not oppose it. In that context liberals favor societal change without limits whereas conservative types also do, except within their model of permissible behavior. As an example a liberal of any type is far more likely to accept rap as their preferred genre of music than conservatives. Many modern and classic churches still consider rock music to be evil, but this is based on leadership rather than the general population. The majority of young people I know do enjoy rock and some even gothic heavy metal despite it being classified as anathema. The realistic consensus and the perceived one do not match despite there being an agreement. It's somewhat of a societal paradox the word "majority" does not imply consensus, but rather an accord.
To return to my initial point, progressives passively view change without resistance, whereas conservatives allow such a thing only if it fits their norms. A great demonstration of this principle is how liberals are far more likely to allow their kids to have unrestricted access on their phones and some conservatives may not allow their children to have phones until middle or even high school. It's not necessarily that they're against phones themselves but the unknown, unpredictable, and uncontrollable situations that arise cannot be tolerated or accepted when they are beyond the parent's authority. Both are capable of engaging in tech culture, but traditional families know they will struggle far more with that interference in their lives than a liberal who thinks a psychologist can solve any problem their children have for them. It's very true liberals have far more struggles adapting to tech culture as families. Look at the divorce, suicide, depression, and mental illness rates of high-tech liberals compared to conservative families. Liberals are far more likely to accept progressive technology even if it harms their lives. Adult gender reveal parties immediately come to mind.