From Gregory Cohen (https://www.github.com/gregoryc/democracy)

First, I want to share a big struggle of mine, and it has been a struggle for years.
This struggle is now coming more into the limelight, into the forefront of the modern
culture.

As much as the chaos of the past recent years might seem crazy, a lot of good
things have been happening; a lot of pretenses have been unraveling.

The struggle has to do with the existence of discourse and free speech in the
society in general, not in theory but in practice.

In 2013, when I turned 18, I had a young mind, not jaded or upset by any kind of
failures. I was in a lot of pain—I was born in a really, really, really, really extreme
physical situation, I have mostly overcome this situation now.

Children get taught, in a society like this, that anyone can talk about anything, and,
many believe, that they can actually have conversations about things.

I communicate very freely, I can express my thoughts and feelings very well.
But, most people can't. I have learned this the hard way in the past 10 years since.

It might seem like “bots” are harming the current culture, but “bots,” literal and figurative
(i.e., people) have been harming the culture for decades and decades.

For a society so ostensibly based on “science” (group agreements), one would
think that “anything” can be talked about.

This is not the case.

There are ways to deal with this.

The method of Civilization resolution, an applied method for the last 247 years, a
“technology” if you will to improve the society, has been “Democracy,” or Democratic
Republics and democracy in general. Such has not worked very well for the resolution of
the civilization itself.

What is interesting is this is a technology of dealing with the civilization, with the
masses. It is not the only technology. Something such as Twitter could do the same thing,
perhaps even better. But the premise is that if everyone can have sway on who is the
leader in power, that that sway, after many instances of “Choice,” would lead to an
improved, and ideally, mostly rectified Civilization.

This does not work very well.

But what is interesting is that there could be other technologies or methodologies
of Civilizational resolution that can exist in tandem with democracy. One example is
Twitter, New Twitter.

But there are some problems. And Elon Musk is struggling now, and even sacrificing his own values.
◦ The common man doesn't want peace.
◦ The common man doesn't care about free speech, doesn't care about
speaking what is on their mind, and doesn't care about
putting out “Superior Statements,” which is
the foundation of workable democracy, or come up with “coherent points.” This is very important.

◦ The common man doesn't want civilizational resolution, out of jealousy, malice,
fear of death, upset over having been wronged, etc., the common man continually
chooses leaders who destroy each other and his fellows.

◦ The common man likes chaos, childish behavior, and immaturity.

These are unfortunate circumstances, but they are qualities of Current Man.

Here is what happened recently.

1) Elon Musk purchased Twitter for $44 billion USD. He started with the basis of
Free Speech, he wanted to re-democratize Twitter essentially. (For reference, Elon
Musk really believes in democracy, he believes in direct democracy).
2) He immediately started firing people who would interfere with free speech and
communication.
3) A lot of upset happened, a lot of people got mad, only 1/5 of the people at Twitter
remained after firings (people who were willing to be dedicated, etc.).
4) He turned Twitter into a free-speech organization, an organization dedicated to
foundational democratic ideals.

But a lot of companies stopped advertising with Twitter.

And so now he is caving. He democratically did a poll, whereby his own userbase
democratically decided they didn't want him, and so he's stepping down.
The new person is good at advertising but is against the foundational principles
that he was promulgating and stating. Moreover, he stated to hate the W.E.F., but she is a
board member of the W.E.F.
So his democratic experiment failed.
He paid $44 billion dollars to fail.
He failed because of the previous points stated (the bullet points listed above).
People don't want peace, sanity, to be enlightened, to be more able as people, etc.
Moreover, GETTING PEOPLE TO LISTEN TO “GOOD IDEAS,” IS
EXTREMELY HARD.
PEOPLE ARE RATHER SET IN THEIR WAYS. GETTING PEOPLE TO EVEN
BE WILLING TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT “GOOD IDEAS,”
IS EXTREMELY HARD, TOO.
There is kind of a spectrum that goes like this
[intellectual thought / good ideas] .... [lowest common denominator / everyday people / “the masses”]
What could be understood by 1 person, for the second category, there would be
10,000 things.
Here are some open ended questions, they are hard to answer.
1) How does one present or create good ideas, while appealing to the masses in
marketing, advertising, usage reach and appeal, to be used by hundreds of millions of
people?
This is a very, very hard question. It might be the only question that people should
be asking!
Good ideas would include such things as inventions, creations, art that could
improve culture, science, philosophy, etc.
Most things that I can think of that are new that appeal to the masses, end up
harming people, in fact, they might do more bad than good.
For example, TikTok, social media, various trends, ChatGPT (in many ways), cell
phones (in many ways), etc.
For someone to truly succeed, there would need to be BOTH points in place
(sound ideas, AND broad widespread appeal). But reconciling the two is really, really
tough.
Also, it's not enough to “follow the trend,” one has to be a trendsetter and do things that
are actually philosophically proper. There is no alternative. There is nothing else that can
be done.
(Supposedly, for Albert Einstein, it took him a decade before people were willing
to listen to him.)
Well, I had a new free speech idea before Elon began with his Twitter plan. I have
a lot of ideas, but I had a good idea in 2021, and I have two (at least) fleshed out
implementations of it.
I have a new form of epistemology and physics that undercuts and nicely
complements what currently exists that I have tried to have conversations about since
2018 but no one was willing to talk (no commentary negative, neutral, or positive, just
stupidity).
I have 93 methods of human self-empowerment that I created. I have many, many
songs with meaningful lyrics that I have created.
But it is in everyone's interest to PUSH as much as possible in the direction of
cultural improvement, and use music to improve culture and use FREE SPEECH to
improve culture.
Then there is the question of “popularity,” “mass appeal,” and money.
So there are the two points again.
How does one manage these two points?