I believe the enemies of truth and freedom fear a light being shined on their strategies, fear the truth. So speaking my truth and sharing my experience is one way of ‘fighting back’. Also, I will not stoop to the level of downvoting, I do not believe in ‘punishing’ those I disagree with; I only want to live and let live, and not be bullied. I am not ‘threatening’ to leave the blockchain, simply stating the fact of the matter that it may soon occur. I will likely not disappear entirely if I do so, only focus more time and effort elsewhere and power down my HV. In the same way Big Tech social media hopes to drive independent users off their platforms with censorship, bullying and such tactics, so do some powerful characters on here. Does that mean we should stay in such a toxic environment in which we are stifled? I think not; to support such platforms is to support the very tyranny they encourage and engage in. So in a way, yes, leaving is appeasing to their wishes, but also, enough people leaving any system will cause that system to collapse and implode upon itself, which is certainly not what they want. There are different ways to fight battles and win wars. I do not have a well-planned strategy to fight any particular one who has made themselves my enemy; my strategy as I know it against the powers of darkness as a whole is to speak truth and shine light on darkness in the best way I can, and attempt to survive the insanity this world is coming to. I also made this post to make others aware of tactics being used to target dissent; what comes of it or not was not my main concern, but simply shining a light on bullying many may not be aware occur on the blockchain.
Thank you for the comment, as always! To truth and freedom. I hope you have a wonderful day.
People see themselves as truth seekers, but they do not belong to the same truth camp. An environment always has elements of agreement and conflict or it appears neutral. If the environment is large enough to contain different views of life, these different views will express themselves. Some moderate, others offensive.
In the vast field of possibilities, there are forms of expression that make neither one truth nor the other the object. As I see it, precisely because of this, they can often express more truth than a direct focus.
I see it more as when the people cannot get hold of those who made their situation the way it is, the people turn on each other. The question is how much consciousness is actually left in this case, where one can no longer see friends in front of all the enemies.
What irritates me about both mentalities is the attitude "whoever is not for me is against me" or the statement "whoever does nothing is complicit". I actually see such statements as mutually confirming, especially from the strongly opposing camps, and my perception of what is happening is that it perpetuates the conflict by creating guilt and shame. Even though that may not be your intention, couldn't it be seen that way?
Exposing your opponent in public I think is an unclean means, where if it were used on you, it would probably be strongly opposed by you? Are you sure that you are not ambivalent about punishment, or from an external point of view, the public exposure of an opponent could not be perceived as such?
The search for the guilty can be very effective in preventing me from coming into contact with my other qualities.
All that said, I would actually like to differentiate between what you research and publish in terms of found materials. I have often left you a comment or an upvote on this. ... For me, I find that I am less and less interested in it and want to go further, because in my opinion the issue will only be settled when people finally "forget" about it, as they actually always do.
But according to my self-understanding, there is not THE point in time when this could be transferred from me to others. It is not up to me to control when one intends to settle a matter.
Greetings to you.