Love
not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man
love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
1
John 2:15
And
be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing
of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable,
and perfect, will of God.
Romans
12:2
Ye
adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the
world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the
world is the enemy of God.
James
4:4
I
have heard the question asked more times than I care to remember: Are
you on Facebook? My answer is always the same: No. I don't use any
kind of social media. Usually I don't bother elaborating, not unless
the questioner seems truly interested in my reasons.
Just
a brief statement, for clarity: Facebook is, and always has been, a
government operation for data extraction and collection on
individuals, which is used as a tool for social engineering,
propaganda, and ultimately, control. Social media, in general, is a
tool of the surveillance society, the totalitarian collectivism of
the anti-Christian New World Order.
And,
if people's lives are so empty that they resort to seeking “friends”
on Facebook, what a crying shame.
This
report serves as my position statement on what the Internet has
become, and the reasons I have chosen to limit my use of it. More
than that, it will reveal my intense dislike of the intrusive and
disrespectful culture it has spawned.
A
culture where respect for the privacy, personal boundaries and
spiritual integrity of individuals is a thing of the past, as people
voluntarily publish the most minute and intimate details of their
lives for all the world to see. And while they're at it, they drag in
the names of others who are not so inclined, whose lives, as they
have every right to determine, are not an open book, fodder for all
and sundry to examine. I am just one such individual.
They
not only do not respect the privacy and boundaries of others, they do
not even acknowledge the rights of the individuals whose privacy they
are invading. Well, everybody does it, they smugly proclaim. As if
that is a defense of the ethically indefensible, a justification for
the unjustifiable. And no, “everybody” most certainly does not do
it.
A
culture which encourages exploitation, aggression and predatory
behaviors by opportunists, mountebanks and snake oil salesmen, quite
a few of whom are criminals. A culture populated by gossips, meddlers
and busybodies, who clearly believe they have the 'right' to invade
the lives of others, simply because they have the means and
opportunity to do so. As for the motives, they range from seeking the
approval of the world (ego-gratification, self-aggrandizement), to
raking in ill-gotten profits at the expense of others; and worst of
all, to assault others with their vile perversions.
Not
that there is anything new under the sun, this has always been the
way of the world. But the culture of the Internet has made it far
more difficult for people of faith to live a Christian life, with the
values of the world intruding on every side.
For
me personally, this culture has become a minefield, a source of
stress and troubles galore. A culture, especially as a Christian, I
want no part of. It is tailor made for those whose love is for the
things of the world, rather than the love of and obedience to God.
Not
just the Internet, but 'smart phones', and related technology, which
has created a population of tranced-out screen zombies. The screen is
always on, always at hand. Any activity in their lives will be
interrupted, as the endless flow of messages pop up, accompanied by
various beeps, buzzes and ringtones of noise pollution. The screen
zombies are 'on call' (literally) 24/7, seemingly enslaved by the
fear of missing a message. Heaven forbid!
My
uses of the Internet are limited to e-mail (used only for brief
messages or sending documents); publishing reports on my website, and
as a guest on radio programs; doing research.
In
today's world, it is virtually impossible to function without this
technology. Finding products, services or organizations? There is no
other way.
Before
the Internet, if you wanted to hire some sort of service, you could
simply look up a number in a phone book. You could call the number,
get a real live person on the line, request the information you
needed, and decide to hire that service – or not. Now, you are
asked to 'sign up', 'sign in' or 'log in', in order to even access
the information. Otherwise, you are blocked from any further
information you need. Unless I can find a phone number to call, where
I can speak to a human being, they will not get my business.
Since
there are no public phone booths anymore, few hardcopy phone
directories, you would be hard-pressed to be able to communicate
without a cell phone. Most people use cell phones exclusively, and
don't have a landline in their homes. As I have heard some say, their
whole lives are on their phones. And what will happen if they lose
the phone? Disaster will follow, as they have invested all they have
in a device, a mere piece of equipment.
I
have a basic cell phone, an old prepaid model, no contract, not
listed under any name. I use it only when necessary when I am not at
home, or for emergencies when driving. Otherwise, it is turned off.
Period.
For
quite some time, texting has been the preferred method, rather than a
phone conversation. I have never sent a text message. I don't know
how, and have no desire to learn. The few persons who have my cell
number know that it is turned off most of the time; if they want to
reach me they can call me at home. If I am out they can leave a voice
mail.
They
have also been told that I do not communicate by texting. And yet,
some continue to disregard my clearly stated wishes by sending text
messages. My 'response' is to simply hit the DELETE button, without
reading the message.
I
have actually been harassed by people who do not seem to understand
the simple phrase: I DO NOT USE TEXT MESSAGES, NOR DO I ACCEPT THEM.
And
yet, they continue to badger me, telling me that I need to 'adapt'.
No, I 'need' to do no such thing, just because other people find it
to be convenient for them. I have even recently learned, to my
dismay, that some people have decided to automatically translate
voice mail into text messages. This they say, is more 'convenient'.
So, they will never even hear anything I had to say. Instead, they
will receive a sterile message devoid of the actual meaning I
intended to convey. My response to that, once I learned that my
intended messages are not getting through, is that if I call them and
they don't pick up, I disconnect the line. They can choose to call me
back, or not.
I
refuse to become a zombified slave to other people's convenience. I
am not available 24/7; I will not be pressured to answer messages on
anyone's timeline, and I will not be forced into their soulless mode
of communication. It is depersonalizing in the extreme, and I refuse
to be drawn into this system.
If
they really want to hear from me, if it is actually important to
them, they will make an actual phone call and speak to me. If not,
that tells me all I need to know.
Back
to the Internet. The prevailing trend is now to use Twitter and
Facebook (as well as other social media), even for journalists. They
post a brief statement on Twitter, which often leads to a link to
another site. Often that site is Facebook. For someone like me, who
does not use Facebook, that means that more often than not I am
unable to access the page.
Some
people have told me that they use Facebook only as a platform to
promote their work, or as a professional venue as a 'public figure'.
I won't criticize them for that, it is not my business. I can only
say that since I am unable to access what they are promoting, if they
don't choose to make it public for all to see, they may lose any
support or promotion I may have otherwise given, since I am locked
out from their material.
Countless
times, I have heard or read the complaints from users of Facebook: I
have been suspended from Facebook! I have been banned from Facebook!
My Facebook page has been shut down! Woe is me!
My
question is, why would anyone willingly be a part of a system that
censors, blocks, suspends, bans them? An operation which does not
allow them their God-given right to free speech? Which tries to force
their politically correct, totalitarian, marxist/socialist/communist
standards on the content? WHY? Why, I wonder, don't they just free
themselves from the tyranny and get the hell off Facebook!
One
of many reasons I refuse to use Twitter or Facebook, is that simply
by doing so the user invites contact from the general public, along
with their comments. The automated system also sets things up so that
the user's name is linked to any of a number of other accounts,
without their previous knowledge or consent. Evidently, this doesn't
bother most people, but it is insufferable to me. I don't want my
name associated with strangers, known charlatans, or people who are
my enemies, simply because a computer system run by robots,
bureaucrats and social engineers decides there is relevance where
none exists.
Then,
there is the function of 'blocking'. So-and-so blocked me on
Facebook! So-and-so blocked me on Twitter! They publicly announce
this in a hissy fit to all and sundry. This system produces a culture
of suspicion and hostility, where the approval seekers are in a
constant battle, jockeying for supremacy and oneupmanship. To what
end? By the same token, they boast about who “follows” them. As
if their whole purpose, the ultimate goal of their lives, is to get
followers, “likes”, and hit counts. To be pleasers of men, rather than followers of Christ.
On
You Tube, the users are battling against others for subscribers.
This, in part, is about money. I understand that some people make a
living on the Internet by producing content. Again, I would not
criticize them for that. But I don't subscribe, nor join up, nor sign
in, in order to have access to any content. The
same goes for pay walls. If content is not free, I don't pay to
access it, no matter how interested I might be.
Then,
there is 'Patreon'. Most users (podcasts, talk shows, print media)
offer special benefits and exclusive content to subscribers. I
understand, they have to fund their enterprises. And there are some
individuals and organizations I would gladly support, had I the
resources. All I am able to do, given my circumstances of living in
dire poverty, is to promote them by placing a link to their websites
on my own site. If I had the money, I would send a donation, or
regular donations, by post. But I would draw the line at subscribing,
or using Paypal.
On
these issues, I speak strictly for myself. I don't expect others to
agree with me, nor do I try to force my views on them. The one thing
I do expect is that others will respect my privacy, my personal
boundaries and my right to self-determination, based on my Christian
faith. I will not be a part of this system, on principle.
Here's
a question to ponder: When Jesus returns, in all His glory, to judge
the living and the dead, do you really believe He will be using
social media?
Jesus
is NOT on Facebook.
Barbara
Hartwell
August
8, 2019