Would libertarian, open-sourced co-op social media offset corporate social media censors?

 The problems of social media sites that are owned by corporations concerning censorship are innumerable. It is thus surprising that more libertarian social media sites publicly owned and maintained by users that are quite tolerant of free speech don’t much exist so far as I know.

Social media content tends to disappear over time if it isn’t what the owners regard as helpful to their political or corporate benefit. That creates big headaches for people with their content deleted. Some of the M.S.M. would say it is extremism that is being deleted, and of course they define for-themselves what extremism is. History and social media is made by the victors and wealthy corporate deep pocket owners.

Citizens need reliable public social media infrastructure so they can write whatever they like without concern for it disappearing They should be assured that it will last for decades. Social media should not be an elite media that is filtered by various exclusive others to further their political interests. It is amusing that even the left these days positively chortle when writing to someone being censored that the social media is private so they can do whatever they like and bite it therefor- get a lawyer if you want (corporate media can afford lawyers more so than private citizens of lesser means). So long as corporate social media supports all of the basic leftist planks of abortion, homosexuality, legal dope and so forth the left are happy sycophants in building the repression of free speech in the U.S.A. Public owned social media to provide a non-volatile balance for free speech in a free country would be a positive change.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative#:~:text=A%20cooperative%20(also%20known%20as,a%20jointly%2Downed%20enterprise%22.

The defense of freedom sometimes requires the public sector to act when the private sector isn’t capable of providing necessary social media themselves. It may always be the case that intelligence that is excellent seems extreme to the average Joe Stalins and Adolph Eichmanns occupying the banal center political stage where sycophancy works best. If all ideas are freely expressed rather than repressed then people can at least encounter good ideas as well as average, heavily cloned concepts.

Forms for publicly secure social media could be co-opts, or co-opts partly government financed, or servers and sites sponsored by parties like Libertarian and Green parties that are tolerant of different opinions even if they are sent to a right or conservative frequency of their spectrum of varieties of political speech. I believe Facebook already sorts out material according to political persuasion to a certain extent. Plainly more than political speech would be expressed at a Libertarian social media site and that is good. For there are myriad undreampt of ideas of an infinite variety of forms that can be discovered in thought that should not be filtered or deleted by crass corporate social media minders that are tools for brainwashing Americans.

Prisons and economic condition hypotheticals

 It’s very hard to predict what would occur in the paradigm of deep economic depression concerning prisons. The Biden administration has said it will eliminate private prisons and create, I would guess, state-operated union job staffed facilities. Those have a sliding investment allocation in regard to how much is spent on prisons and prisoners. One may invest little or nothing and yet keep people in jail- look at how little Vietnamese P.O.W. camps for Americans cost the communists. Obviously reform is need on a large scale that would reduce costs before an economic crash.

Prison reform is one of the areas of governance that has a lot of expense and not enough new ideas. Computer c.p.u.’s improve from one generation to the next (about a year and a half) yet some human institutions never really get much more efficient at rehabilitating criminals. Plainly some prisoners were imprisoned in the reconstruction era in order to provide free or cheap convict labor, and some social classes prosper when an underclass requires much incarceration and supervision. Those are complex social problems that persist along with original sin and the challenges of making pervasive institutional improvements politically.

Plato's opinion against poetry; justified?

 So much knowledge is lost to history. Perhaps the basic reason why Sumerian clay tablets and cuneiform are thought to be the start of writing is that no one else that wrote before had a good portable medium for writing that would last the ages. It may not be simply coincidental that the first writing discovered in history started where there was clay for tablets and writing hard copy followed by a recession of sea level and desertification of Sumer and Ur so people would leave and writing would lay safely buried in sand until discovery. Perhaps that was natural selection and writing on portable mediums like goat skin faded away in weather at some unknown location. History does not provide us with knowledge about content of all of the crude poems publicly recited in Athenian Greece of Plato’s day- maybe some of it was quite vulgar and luckily lost to posterity.

Yet of poetry that existed then (and I am not an expert on that or even on Plato’s writing), I believe Sappho and Pindar were the greatest of the classical era. Poetry though usual was in the form of plays perhaps, and some of the plays of the majors performed then may have been offensive politically and socially to Plato. Since Plato wrote prose- quite non-lyrical, he may have regarded the natural divide between himself and lyric poets in literature more along the paradigmatic axis (meaning) rather than the syntagmatic axis (of form). I doubt that if a lyric poet of his day wrote an ode to oligarchy (Plato-Socrates preferred oligarchy over democracy) that Plato would have been so peeved.

Democracy definitely has problems and runs toward irrationality on occasion. Plato’s Republic (or that of Socrates) was an ideal state comparatively, in theory. Someone wrote that the French would say that some things work in practice but not in theory- The Republic of theory may not alternately work in practice. Plato and Socrates would have wanted society to at least work for an ideal state however, and I can sympathize with the concept that the United States would be a much better place with more logic, understanding and effort to make an ideal state rather than to just it go and trust in the blind, invisible hand of capitalism. Seventy years after the Green revolution people continue to starve periodically on Earth- should one just rely on Adam Smith’s paradigm to relieve famines or to react to them?

Comparing Plato's soul and Freud's psyche

 Plato and Freud’s concepts respectively of the soul and the psyche can be compared. That is a good question. Each has three distinct parts; appetite spirit, and reason versus id, ego, and superego. Each has an etymology from psyche in Greek.

Plato’s troika is eternal while Freud’s is a temporal process (presumably). Neither has a purely material or physical existence although they occur in the matter of the brain. Each appear to be a way of classifying characteristics of human experience that today might be explained away through entirely material processes, yet one might also explain away matter through quantum phenomena like the Higgs field as well leaving nothing besides spirit at the heart of anything (in a sense like that of Leibnitz and his one-dimension spiritual monads could be taken as representative of a member of a set of theoretical spiritual structures sustaining energy).

Modern moral acts

 In my opinion morally acceptable acts (for those are determined by social consensus) are usual therefore immoral acts are easier to define. For example, if A through Z behaviors are regarded as moral, and numbers -1…-10 are immoral behaviors, in a book full of letters the numbers stand out so even speed readers can see them.

Because morality is defined by actual social behavior that passes without substantive reproof when the majority is wrong about the right or wrongness of moral acts good and moral acts may be punished and immoral acts rewarded.

Socrates noted a particular kind of situation in a different context- one where a completely evil guy is enriched, promoted and admired socially though he has a hidden side of wickedness unknown to the public, and the public is fooled into believing the fellow is a paragon of goodness.

If there are transcendent moral systems, rule based, that are absolute, deontological duties given by God (actually) then failure to cohere within moral norms have a high possibility of eternal or significant negative reinforcement. If morality is determined by ruling pejorative political opinions that Democrats, for instance, or Chief Justice Roberts force upon the public with the help of the corporate world who enjoy manipulating the public perhaps into easy compliance with behaviors that reinforcement social stratification through the concentration of wealth, then negative reinforcement may be more proximal in regard pejoratively defined immoral behavior such as writing publicly in opposition to homosexual marriage.

Cancelling moral norms of thousands of years longevity as functions and derivatives of evolution theory and population density globally may be approved for various political and economic reasons as simple ways to evolve political economy democratically (nominally at least though it is forced by elites). Relatively abstractly designed artificial new moral norms engineered to advance temporal political economics may have unintended consequences of less than optimal substance in comparison to moral criteria satisfying all sides or most sides concerned with important moral issues.

The First Poet

Humanity did not begin thinking with the invention of writing. Actually humans were able to think as long ago as 100,000 B.C.E. Besides inventing spears they may have invented thought with recurrent word patterns and phrases, for they were able to think with more than onomatopoeic grunts. Things like “you put the lime in the coconut, mix them both up, put the lime in the coconut, drink them together”…repeat. Early recurrent or rhyming phrases could be as old as art. Apparently recent discoveries have been made that indicate Neanderthals may have painted cave art too.

There were oral traditions in numerous cultures (notably Semitic) of keeping history in something like verse because that is easier to remember and probably preceded the invention of writing. Arabs were keeping such histories unto the time of Mohammed. British bards wondered about with historic, entertaining neo-truths for performance long before literacy became ubiquitous At least one prisoner in the Soviet Gulag used the same method according to Solzhenitsyn, writing thousands of lines with clever first letter in order line keys to help recall the content.

Those first letter keys are considered acrostics and have occurred at least as early as the court of Solomon in the 10th century B.C. Acrostics in the Hebrew Bible The verses of proverbs may be regarded as actual poetry. Maybe Solomon was the first literary poet, Oral poetry would have found the use of clever poetic feet challenging, and thus it is slow to appear in history and is found first in the Hebrew Bible perhaps, and later is developed more fully with the ancient Greek poets.

Enheduanna of the ancient civilization of Sumer is sometimes credited with being the first poet because the Sumerians invented writing circa the 30th century B.C.E. (although I seem to recall reading somewhere that fragments of the Gilgamesh epic were dated to the 4th century B.C.E. and maybe the 5th). She wrote hymns to a pagan deity. Sumerians were able to write on clay tablets for posterity.

The wikipedia article on Sumerian literature leaves the verdict on Sumerian poetry open; there isn’t enough evidence to form an open on the hymns of Erheduanna or other Sumerians being verse and poetry though they might have been couplets etc.

“Most Sumerian literature is written in left-justified lines,[1] and could contain line-based organization such as the couplet or the stanza,[2] but the Sumerian definition of poetry is unknown. It is not rhymed,[3][4] although “comparable effects were sometimes exploited.”[5] It did not use syllabo-tonic versification,[6] and the writing system precludes detection of rhythm, metre, rhyme,[7][8] or alliteration.[9] Quantitative analysis of other possible poetic features seems to be lacking, or has been intentionally hidden by the scribes who recorded the writing.”

Sumerian literature - Wikipedia

King David of Israel wrote the psalms that were in verse somewhat earlier than the Greek poets circa 1000 B.C.E. In Hebrew the form was couplets and triplets.

The Homeric poets were of the 3th century B.C.E. They wrote in dactylic pentameter. Hesiod was around that era and the first well-known woman poet of Greece named Sappho used a different meter, an Aeolic verse form called eponymously the Sapphic stanza in the 7th-6th centuries. Early Greek Poets Timeline

A poem for the differently-abled

In the dark of civilization

Beowolf lusted to slaughter Grendel

a neanderthalic remnant

half-bred to hide in the remaining colder region

with the noise of a dominant tide

rising above the din of glaciers melting down

fading away the dawn of time

had differential gears

nooks, crannies, skewers

eclectic celestial chords of discord

disquieting to the troubled and lost

wanderers around the margins

of the cultivated economy

where wars are profitable

even in potential the industry of death

removes the odd against discomfort

destroys the devastation of equality

with those differently abled

disarmed souls of silence

repressed by legions of drones

games of thrones.