Skip to main content

I Still Think Twitter Is Stupid

Fine. I admit it. I am resistant to change. I kept the same ancient flip-open cell phone for 6 years. I had three cracks to get a state-of-the-art power wheechair, and I got the same chair--or close to it--each time. I want 2 things from a power 'chair: 1) Speed; and 2) Toughness. That's why a Quickie P-2 series chair is the one I like. You can't break it. Slam it into doors, walls, whatever you want. Metal foot-rests. With mainly metal parts. And batteries you don't have to think about. Other companies, take note. I digress.

All that is to say, I stick with what works. Feel free to dismiss me therefore as an unenlightened stick in the mud. Maybe I am. But at heart, a traditionalist is not afraid of change or of new things; on the contrary, the best of us help point the way to the future. A traditionalist does not uncritically adopt anything, but assimilates it as best he can with what he already knows.

The internet and all related technology is a great breakthrough. It's on a par with the printing press, in terms of democratizing information and ideas. Few things in life are intrinsically evil; most of the trouble comes when we use a good thing for a bad purpose.

Today, blogging is "old school". It was cutting-edge in 2001 or so, when I started reading them. It's true that anyone can write anything they want, and that isn't always good. But if the sharing of information and especially the reporting of news had become calcified, and a small cadre of elites was too comfortable in its cartel, bloggers came along as a corrective. There is absolutely no doubt that a blogger helped to bring down the presidential candidacy of John Kerry, and the career of Dan Rather. For all the sneering from "professionals," it's clear that aspects of its function as an information aggregator have changed the way we consume news, and there's no going back. I'm worried that most of the talk of "distributism" is in fact ignorance, nostalgia, and sentimentality. But that's an argument for another day.

Twitter is stupid. I've rarely said anything funny, interesting, or useful in 140 characters. Maybe it isn't stupid, but I'm not joining. My ramblings are inane enough without a character limit. Brevity may be the soul of wit, but a true educational experience needs room to breathe. [And you need room to do damage control.--ed.] Nah. There's nothing I've written here I didn't mean to say. I may feel differently now on some things, but I'm still just me.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Friend I Once Had, And The Dogmatic Principle

 I once had a friend, a dear friend, who helped me with personal care needs in college. Reformed Presbyterian to the core. When I was a Reformed Presbyterian, I visited their church many times. We were close. I still consider his siblings my friends. (And siblings in the Lord.) Nevertheless, when I began to consider the claims of the Catholic Church to be the Church Christ founded, he took me out to breakfast. He implied--but never quite stated--that we would not be brothers, if I sought full communion with the Catholic Church. That came true; a couple years later, I called him on his birthday, as I'd done every year for close to ten of them. He didn't recognize my number, and it was the most strained, awkward phone call I have ever had. We haven't spoken since. We were close enough that I attended the rehearsal dinner for his wedding. His wife's uncle is a Catholic priest. I remember reading a blog post of theirs, that early in their relationship, she told him of the p
Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con
My wheelchair was nearly destroyed by a car last night. That's a bit melodramatic, I suppose, because it is intact and undamaged. But we'd left my power chair ("Red Sam" in the official designation) in-between the maze of cars parked out front of Chris Yee's house for Bible Study. [Isn't that a Protestant Bible study?--ed.] They are good friends, and it is not under any official auspices. [Not BSF?--ed.] They're BSF guys, but it's not a BSF study. Anyway, I wasn't worried; I made a joke about calling the vendor the next day: "What seems to be the problem, sir?" 'Well, it was destroyed by a car.' As it happened, a guy bumped into it at slow speed. His car got the worst of it. And this only reinforces what I've said for a solid 13 years [Quickie commercial coming] If you want a power wheelchair that lasts, get a Quickie. They're fast, obviously, and they're tanks. Heck, my old one still would work, but the batteries ar