3 ms·

I can't help but think you're making a lot of not particularly charitable assumptions about people who opt out of online culture in this comment.

theossuary 4y ago
To be fair, they aren't talking about those who "opted out of online culture." They're talking about those who "shrug at politics and social fads and war and rumors of war, and are just fine." I too could be fine with the world if I just ignored everything outside my tiny little bubble. And maybe that's what you're arguing for, the "I've got mine" sentiment? But not everybody can just ignore systemic injustice and not try to cause change, however small.
- JasonFruit 4y ago
  I think you are probably correctly identifying their argument. I think there's no contradiction between recognizing that there's little you can do about national and international matters, and being concerned for the welfare of those you can actually help, among your friends, neighbors, and community. That's not "I've got mine," but as the prayer puts it, "the wisdom to know the difference."
- boeingUH60 4y ago
  Most people who worry about “systemic injustice” do nothing to change it. They just enjoy whining online to the benefit of no one. My feeling is that the people who don’t pay attention to online fads are the people most likely to do good and right wrongs where they can (within their direct community) instead of the people that complain perpetually online about global events they can’t do anything about.
- smaudet 4y ago
  "But not everybody can just ignore systemic injustice and not try to cause change, however small." Its also that, the majority ignoring what "they cannot change" at least directly, is a part of the problem. The majority really should not be "OK", and also able to say they do not condone the more horrific injustices. The majority can change the supposed systemic issues, they don't. The OP in this instance (not the article) makes reference later to the "wisdom to know the difference", which is merely another way of saying, they are unwilling to rock the boat because they are too comfy to do otherwise. The argument about personal family etc., while true, is tangential to the point that you should not be "OK" - OFC everyone must put family, friends first, and crucially _once those are stable_ you can affect the most more change more broadly, not sit on your hands and say "I'm fine".

theossuary 4y ago

To be fair, they aren't talking about those who "opted out of online culture." They're talking about those who "shrug at politics and social fads and war and rumors of war, and are just fine." I too could be fine with the world if I just ignored everything outside my tiny little bubble. And maybe that's what you're arguing for, the "I've got mine" sentiment? But not everybody can just ignore systemic injustice and not try to cause change, however small.

JasonFruit 4y ago
I think you are probably correctly identifying their argument. I think there's no contradiction between recognizing that there's little you can do about national and international matters, and being concerned for the welfare of those you can actually help, among your friends, neighbors, and community. That's not "I've got mine," but as the prayer puts it, "the wisdom to know the difference."
boeingUH60 4y ago
Most people who worry about “systemic injustice” do nothing to change it. They just enjoy whining online to the benefit of no one. My feeling is that the people who don’t pay attention to online fads are the people most likely to do good and right wrongs where they can (within their direct community) instead of the people that complain perpetually online about global events they can’t do anything about.
smaudet 4y ago
"But not everybody can just ignore systemic injustice and not try to cause change, however small." Its also that, the majority ignoring what "they cannot change" at least directly, is a part of the problem. The majority really should not be "OK", and also able to say they do not condone the more horrific injustices. The majority can change the supposed systemic issues, they don't. The OP in this instance (not the article) makes reference later to the "wisdom to know the difference", which is merely another way of saying, they are unwilling to rock the boat because they are too comfy to do otherwise. The argument about personal family etc., while true, is tangential to the point that you should not be "OK" - OFC everyone must put family, friends first, and crucially _once those are stable_ you can affect the most more change more broadly, not sit on your hands and say "I'm fine".