Delusions of grandeur or merely arrogant ignorance?
The creators of yet another spurious app. that gives people the technical means to judge others as if a commodity, likened their entrepreneurship to radically existential counter-thinking, claiming their money-making enterprise as radical.
These entrepreneurs’ egotism was evident when they suggested an existential parallel between their crass app. that merely takes thought to a smaller, materialist place wherein its medium gives it more credence than it is worth, and the philosophical based considerations that a) mankind and b) the earth were not the centre of the universe.
The makers’ idea that there is any intellectual comparison between their dismally boring app. and existential thinking of conditional import is gross egotism. What makes their self-absorption more contemptible is that they, as intellectual owners of the unimaginative gadget/app. will be arbiters of those comments and judgements considered negative and possibly provocative, as if their judgemental acumen is any more valuable than those using the app to abuse or merely criticise others. This shows their lack of radicalism in that they are using the same zeitgeist political correctness that effectively constrains free-speech. We know that this anti-criticism ethos is one created by business as the corporate bodies do not want legitimate criticism of their unethical practices and slavish mechanisms. This app will merely affirm the move towards less and less freedom of expression and speech, insidiously promoted as radical knowledge in the development of mankind. This egotism is cynical and typical of the entrepreneurial ‘spirit’.
The resultant bickering this app will facilitate and promote will not further any cause in releasing us from the restrictive, unblemished portfolio mentality of conglomerates and power agencies. It will only result in those proletarians obsessed with being heard voicing their own self-serving opinions to the detriment of proper debate about shared values and the entropy of freedom.
Such enterprises only give credence to feeble, flaccid ideas of freedom that allow complaints, especially when there’s compensation involved, without any authentic recognition of our rights as free individuals within the power structures that do, effectively control our environment, and consequently our real freedoms of speech, thought, expression and movement.
The egotism of entrepreneurialism blinds the perpetrator to the detrimental effects of their so-called enterprise on social, economic and even public exchanges. A tiresome ‘new’ app that merely benefits the owners/creators financially due to mass consumption of an electronic product adding nothing to any proper and useful debate. Instead such technology merely creates a ‘feeding frenzy’ of the disenfranchised, whose ire and criticism should be heard and felt by the power brokers but is only spat out at others as themselves, who rather than recognising their shared subjection to remote power, pour vitriol on one another while leaving in tact the powers that control the parameters of any debate through encouragement of technological devices as political palliatives.
There’s also the psychological element of such enterprise that sees us as human beings undermining one another and as a consequence ourselves to become less self-defined and authentically outspoken in political arenas, where it matters. Technology has worked well for existing power structures in facilitating very localised and ultimately impotent chatter that exists in lieu of authentic freedoms and is promoted as liberating to the masses: TV voting is one previous example of this sleight-of-hand by agencies of power that keep the disenfranchised ignorant of their own alienation through political mechanisms that enslave rather than liberate. Technological devices have played their part in creating the impression of individual expression whilst seriously reducing authentic freedom by extending the reach of power into the minds of the users of technology, resulting in self-serving opinion about very trivial matters, whilst causing a cynicism in use of what are still touted as political mechanisms of freedom; voting being a prime example. This ‘new’ app will merely repeat these same misconceptions of freedoms, legitimise atomisation and reduce useful debate to technologically hosted slanging matches between the disenfranchised. The maker/owners of the app claim that they are offering a new concept yet are producing a technological mechanism that merely facilitates what we already can do, which is to exercise our minds by assessing behaviours by and ideas of one another, without the interference from cynical prompts of entrepreneurs and economic opportunists, whose primary impulse is personal profit making.
Technology gains credibility by default with the promotion of ‘ready-made’ judgement of people that will undermine an individual’s own confidence in assessing people they meet, causing dependency on others’ opinion, creating greater vulnerability to deception.