Why Blogs Don’t Matter (But sort of do)

This blog is the first blog I have ever made, and perhaps the last. I’ve been less enthusiastic about writing it lately, but that  is probably because I haven’t watched any politically incorrect films lately that would inspire me to write on here.

Another reason why I am not inspired to write more blog posts is the small audience that my blog has. I’ve only received 392 views for all of my posts since I started last September.

That is a shitty number.

Piss poor audiences result a low number of comments, which gives me little insight into the quality of my posts.

I know some of my posts vary in quality but I want to know what readers think about my posts and my blog in general. Receiving little to no feedback on my posts has caused me to care considerably less about writing here. This sucks because, I was excited to write (and rant) about something I’m interested in.

This is one of the great things about blogs. They tend to be personal and focused, which allow for readers to come across a wide variety of niche subjects and interesting personalities online. Within the CreComm Blog Network for Red River College, there are blogs on many obscure subjects, like rants, content marketing, and even “over-analyzing Jeff Goldblum.”

The personal, often subjective nature of blogging is highly appealing to casual writers who are interested in writing things online that could not get published anywhere else.

Tumblr currently has 287 million blogs, with 131.7 blog posts, according to its website (read more stats at https://www.tumblr.com/about). That’s a lot of writing, which shows you that blogs do matter. They matter to writers.

But how about readers. Do they care about niche subjects? Perhaps, if they are well written, focused, and the writers are committed to consistently churning out quality writing.

I personally will stick to podcasts, mainly because they can be extremely funny.

Here’s a hilarious, politically incorrect bit from an old Norm Macdonald podcast.









Reservations was a very strange play. The first play was well done. It’s presented a simple story of inheritance. The second half was a travesty. It was an anti-capitalist, environmentalist guilt trip that ineptly tried to make a connection between Martin Heidegger’s views on nature and Aboriginal views on nature.

The first half was about a father and daughter in a dispute over land. I think it was  well executed. The conflict was also relevant. Who does the land belong to? The Siksika people, those who originally owned the land or Anna, the daughter of the man who is willing to give away his land to Aboriginals.

The problem in this story is clear. One woman has felt that her father’s land belongs to her because he owned it. Her father, Pete, think it’s a better idea to give the land away to the previous owners. The conflict that grows between Pete, Anna, and Pete’s wife, Esther, the Aboriginal wife of Pete, is well portrayed. The multi-dimensional conflict between the three asks the question of who should really get Pete’s land once he’s gone.

The moral dilemma between the three creates an interesting conflict that shows multiple perspectives. That of a woman who has waited for years to the her father’s land, and that of a man who thinks that the the Siksika are the rightful owners.

The second half is a free-for-all. This story involves a couple with three foster children in Child and Family Services (CFS). The mother, Jenny, feels like they are hers, and owe nothing to her culture, while her husband, Mike thinks that CFS has a right to teach Aboriginal culture to Aboriginal foster children, and take these children back to their reserves.

There is nothing wrong with this narrative. What’s wrong with this story is the way it’s told. With a lecture featuring Martin Heidegger and a comparison with his philosophy to Aboriginal philosophy.

Why? Why go on for so long with a comparison between the two? This is the worst, most abstract way to describe the Aboriginal connection to nature. A simpler connection should have been made between Aboriginal views on nature but it wasn’t.

I nearly fell asleep.


Trump Part 2

For those of you who think Donald Trump is popular because certain people like him or identify with him, you are wrong. Dead wrong. He’s smug without much wit, he’s an attention whore, and finally, he’s the world’s most narcissistic billionaire.

Who the fuck can relate to that? Very few. Especially the uneducated, lower to middle class voters, who have flocked to The Donald in droves.

Part of what makes him so popular is his willingness to advocate on the behalf of the worse-off masses of Americans, without pretending that he’s a part of these masses.

Trump advocates the improvement of America. “Make America Great Again” really means make America like me: Up front, brash, rich, powerful, and successful. He’s like Globo Gym in the film, Dodgeball. He’s better than you and he knows it.

This sense of superiority rubs some the wrong way, but these people weren’t his fans in the first place. If Trump did not act like typical Trump doing his campaign, it would have faltered. Any modesty from this man would feel fake, as people already know his personality from his TV appearances.

One aspect of Trump’s campaign that puzzles Republicans and Democrats alike is how how much support he has considering how little he discusses policy. These people don’t understand that Trump doesn’t need to do this because everyone else does. Instead of discussing issues in terms of policy, he talks about them in terms of fear. Bernie Sanders, President Obama and numerous other high profile politicians tell the American public that any fears over Islam or illegal immigration are irrational or exaggerated. Trump has successfully rationalized these fears for many Americans and this support for them, makes these certain people feel like Trump has their back.

Trump has also pandered to the disenfranchised white voters in a way that makes it clear that he stands by them, without directly saying so, i.e. speaking out against Black Lives Matter, while the other candidates have openly pandered to minorities.



Trump Time

Some people think it’s astonishing that Donald Trump is so successful with his presidential campaign. I find it astonishing that many people are astonished.

Why wouldn’t a guy that shits all over modern politicians be popular? Do people not notice the indirect, phony approach taken by politicians in addressing their voters?