> Democracy means ownership and accountability, along with shared governance.
yeaaaaa no! that's not what democracy means.
> Ownership is also about economics. It is about who benefits. Right now, Facebook is in the process of absorbing huge swaths of the global advertising market, lots of our life-giving communities and now much of politics and media—funnelling the profits mainly to the founders, early investors and other large shareholders.
-.-
> This billionaire’s refusal to recognize the rise of authoritarianism as a symptom of economic inequality and insecurity is startling
Authoritarianism? Sick usage of $5 words... anything to back that claim up with? Inequality is not to be confused with inequity... They are not synonyms.
To the author:
Mark makes a whole lot of sense if you consider the fact that he is talking about a generation that considers sharing a Facebook post to be political engagement. You have to view things from that perspective. You can bash his skull off if you so wish for saying what he believes, but he would not have had that opinion had it not been supported by our shitty behavior as a generation.
Hurling insults and labels is the primary way of having a political discourse these days - prime example being the two general election candidates (basket of deplorables anyone?). This phenomenon can even be seen in this very article you wrote. Now, where do you think the best place to have such eloquent political discourse is? The answer to that is rather simple: Facebook of-course with Twatter being a close second combined with all other social networking sites such as HN.
He understands his audience and he understands this upcoming generation. You can all raise your pitch forks and talk about the awesomeness of democracy and the evil of large corporations. But in reality, every single one of us is contributing to this mess. Mark is merely someone who is capitalizing on our collective moronic behavior. And I personally cannot fault him for that.
yeaaaaa no! that's not what democracy means.
> Ownership is also about economics. It is about who benefits. Right now, Facebook is in the process of absorbing huge swaths of the global advertising market, lots of our life-giving communities and now much of politics and media—funnelling the profits mainly to the founders, early investors and other large shareholders.
-.-
> This billionaire’s refusal to recognize the rise of authoritarianism as a symptom of economic inequality and insecurity is startling
Authoritarianism? Sick usage of $5 words... anything to back that claim up with? Inequality is not to be confused with inequity... They are not synonyms.
To the author:
Mark makes a whole lot of sense if you consider the fact that he is talking about a generation that considers sharing a Facebook post to be political engagement. You have to view things from that perspective. You can bash his skull off if you so wish for saying what he believes, but he would not have had that opinion had it not been supported by our shitty behavior as a generation.
Hurling insults and labels is the primary way of having a political discourse these days - prime example being the two general election candidates (basket of deplorables anyone?). This phenomenon can even be seen in this very article you wrote. Now, where do you think the best place to have such eloquent political discourse is? The answer to that is rather simple: Facebook of-course with Twatter being a close second combined with all other social networking sites such as HN.
He understands his audience and he understands this upcoming generation. You can all raise your pitch forks and talk about the awesomeness of democracy and the evil of large corporations. But in reality, every single one of us is contributing to this mess. Mark is merely someone who is capitalizing on our collective moronic behavior. And I personally cannot fault him for that.