Debt Forgiveness And Limited Languaging

Language around student debt forgiveness or dispersal is ineffective.

When billion dollar corporations and banks desire “debt forgiveness”, y’all’s daddies up on “capitol” hill called it a “bailout”.

Same president who hired a guy that invented “too big to fail” also shytted on university students filing a public grievance nationwide while passing one of usa’s biggest corporate handouts.

When students of working class and lower economic/financial strata seek same sort of safety net, it is framed as giving money to those undeserving.

As if them nazis y’all daddy biden in bed with earned that multi-billion dollar panhandle.

Social Media ::: Free Speech As Product

We believe that social media sells us free speech.

While it does not, or at least has not, most of us believe it should.

We believe it should.

We believe that free speech is just as much a commodity as choice. Or, no choice, since that is what these platforms actually sell.

No choice seems dystopian. And yet, despite what those of us socialized in these united states have been spoon fed, we are constantly purchasing “no choice” branded as convenience.

Algorithms. This decade’s buzzword. Algorithms. Computer programs attached to interfaces that choose what we see based on past consumption patterns. We believe that we are creating content. We believe that we are providing value.

What we believe is belied by this beast’s true nature.

Many of us still believe a company’s objective is to flip money. To secure a return of investment. I no longer believe this. Corporations, like nations, like governments, have an existentialist position. That is, they exist, and they wish to continue to exist. This need to exist is precarious for pure profits.

Content creation, free speech, and other illusions are sold to us. We are told we have a “platform”. Is that what we have?

It seems to me, that we only have a needle in our arms draining us of valuable Life blood. Ideas fused with electromagnetic designs. Bright screens hold us like gnats to a porch light. And how much of this free speech has changed our reality? How much has societal abuse waned?

Not much at all, really.

With all this “wokeness’ abounding, we would think school shootings would have simmered down.

With all this “wokeness” abounding, we would think police killings would have simmered down.

With all this “wokeness” abounding, we would think Black pregnant WOMEN would have less fatal pregnancies.

But muthaphukkkin’ alas…

Democracy Is Not About Who Can Vote, But Who Can Win

Voting is not enough to determine fairness of opportunity. Neither are diversity plays. Not that diversity is limiting, but in these united states, diversity tends to be limited to race, sex, sexual orientation, and gender(or lack thereof). There is a tendency to overlook similarities of representative class, however.

Y’all’s Daddy obeezy might be darker skinned(skint) than george w. bush, but they both are harvard graduates(source). There are 8 former us presidents with harvard degrees. Only other university that can boast of graduating a number of us presidents is yale, and even they have to share george w.

In last 33 years, only joe biden has been elected to office of us president without an ivy league degree(source). None of those elected in that time is without a degree. Whether a person with a degree is eligible to run is of little significance if numbers show that they have more of a chance of picking winning lottery numbers.

Who can win in a democracy matters more than who can run, and even more than who can vote. Representation along class has to have just as much significance in a nation like usa due to its worship of money and level of financial disparity. These same dynamics exist for ideas about who can get rich.

Who can play and who can actually win also matter in what is being referred to as a free market. Capital and access to capital play a much bigger role than most other factors including first mover advantages. All capital is social in my thinking, so it is important to note how much ones network increases their ability to secure large sums of monies, flip that money, and most importantly, stay afloat during downturns or bad decision making.

Curation Demands Citation Too

I absolutely believe that success on these platforms as a curator demands damn near 176% ownership of posts. That means making posts look like they came from YOU.

This can look like:

1) RTs without actually adding “RT” or clicking RT button

2) adding logo watermarks to images(even though YOU didn’t hire that photographer or take that picture

3) Not including links to actual source.

While all of these actions have something questionable, it is this last one, not citing sources, that disturbs me most.

Every barber shop and beauty salon from Maine to Mexican borders got a system of vetting information. It starts with:

Was YOU there???

Did YOU see it???

Who was there???

Who YOU hear it from???

Who or what institution YOU get information from MATTERS.

If they do not show YOU or link YOU to their source in some shape form or fashion, it should be immediately tagged as:

1) Bullshyt,
2) Propaganda, or
3)Fake News.

Thank YOU. This has been another OWL’s Asylum public service announcement. For more, hit that Follow button.

Competition Means More Organizing Not More Money, Per Se

Competition is a dynamic obstacle keeping us away from our goal. Competition is not like a hill one must climb that will stay in place; our competition thinks, adapts, and regroups. It wins. It causes us to lose.

Competition demands that we do more than add new parts. New parts only complicated what is probably an already complicated and overly complex set of moving parts. Competition forces us to reconsider what we already have, and to place what we already have in systems that utilize what we already have in ways that get us closer to our goal.

Our goal is still our goal. That is to say, even with competition, our goal is not to defeat them, they are simply an obstacle on our way to glory. No. Competition is never our goal. Only an obstacle. This means we only use enough resources to understand our competition and our own systems in relation to our competition. But we never lose sight of our goals. In fact, we still remain flexible in our pursuits, even if that flexibility means changing aims. But we NEVER make beating competition our goal.

Competition is just an obstacle; WE cannot allow it to become a distraction.

Competition creates an urgent response for efficiency. This efficiency involves focus of role. When we organize our desks(heaven forbid, right?) we assign a place and thus, a role, for each area. Pens and pen holders have an assigned area, and with a lot of luck(if YOU are like OWL) we put pens where we always put pens and put pens back where we always put them, their assigned area, and role. This creates an ergonomic space. A space suitable for better efficiency of use.

Further, there is a certain amount of cultivation that has to occur. Success without competition, with static obstacles, has to be cultivated. A skateboarder has to cultivate a certain amount of balance, flexibility, and phukkk it, skill, in order to even get to a level where competition with other skaters is even a remote opportunity.

Which is main reason making competition one’s goal is risky. No matter who or what our competition is, We always have to cultivate a level of mastery and talent because today’s competition is tomorrow’s joke. But, we still have goals and objectives to meet, no matter what. It can be corny in today’s conversation , but there is still a ton of Truth in that sentiment that WE are our own biggest competition.

There is a need to cultivate instincts that competition today might not provide. There is a need to cultivate system intelligence and design thinking. We cannot just toss new machinery in and expect it to just work with our present way of doing things. Our work flows have to be cultivated in such a way that we understand instinctively and analytically where a hole SHOULD be filled, not just COULD be. “Oh, we COULD just through a server here…” No. We KNOW what needs to be placed where and have a fairly well reasoned idea of what to expect from such additions.

Some Of My Favorite Twitter Threads(Mar 2022)

https://twitter.com/eileenchongpoet/status/1501038875342303233

Favorite OWL’s Asylum Twitter Posts

Is Joe Biden Really President???

@owlsasylum

Part Of That Interview THEY NOT SHOWING YOU… charlamagnethagod kamalaharris blackmediatrust

♬ original sound – J. OWL Farand

This was a question posed by Charlamagne on his Comedy Central show, “Tha God’s Honest Truth” to Kamala Harris less than one year into her term as vice-president.

What caught my attention was how this was presented on social media. Initial clips of this particular segment(about two to three minutes of a twenty minute conversation) only showed Charlamagne asking this question and an irate and belligerent Kamala Harris responding indirectly in her now world famous blaccent.

What was left out of these clips shared online by liberal negro supporters of Asian-American Harris, was her assistant, Symone Sanders cutting Charlamange off.

This prompted me to consider, one, why hadn’t most people simply gone to Youtube where entire segment was uploaded. Two, what was so damning about Symone’s interruption that most posting this clip felt it needed to be edited out before sharing.

In its entirety, Charlamagne’s interview was driving. He presented questions representative of not only his fanbase, but her voting bloc. Prior to this last segment, Harris was composed and agreeable. It does not appear to be this single question, but a brief pause of confusion caused by Sanders’s interruption that sparked Harris’s need for “sister girl anger”.

There is a danger when a leading representative of a nation must remind you with finger wagging that they hold elected office. That Charlamagne must ask such a question about her administration mate, Joe Biden, speaks volumes, sure, but that her most well thought(she had ample time to reflect during Sanders’s bumbling disruption) reaction was deflection(“don’t go sounding like a republican”) and vitriol only adds more clarity a much too loud gesture of defeat.

From a perspective purely driven by optics, I must wonder why didn’t Harris’s team conduct a pre-interview reading of Charlamagne’s proposed questions. She was caught off guard, and thought she had some carte blanche with a Black person of influence. This only goes to reveal further just how out of touch with Black people this administration remains.