A Spirited Defense for Mass Ideas

I've contributed a blog post everyday for the last hundred and twenty some days and never fully explained why to others or myself. The latter was criminally negligent as we should all be questioning why any of us do anything. Why do we buy what we do, drive where we do, see who we do and so on. The issue just hadn't been thrown in my face until an online colleague made the oft-repeated point that less can sometimes be more. Though more is usually more, I suppose most people try to adopt the phrase, "It is better to appear a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." But I don't see that as a rule of life anymore than one should always drive 30 miles per hour.

I think the wrong people remain silent just as much, if not more, than the wrong people don't shut up. As much as I, or anyone, can--and do--complain about the epidemic spread of obnoxious, opinionated cable news, this only makes up a rather small part in people's daily lives and thus the world in general. What contributes to the world around us are the conversations that take place in the world around us. News, online, in print or on TV, can not hear you so there is no conversations held and I think this mentality is hard to shift out of when we are amongst the living.

If you disagree with somebody, why not make an issue of it? I don't believe nearly 7 billion people can advance individually. Think of it in a capitalist mindset if you must. The more competition (ideas), the stronger the survivors will become. A monopoly gets nobody anywhere and unchecked ideas are no different. Or think of it as a conscious collaboration. But there is nothing to collaborate, nothing to build upon, nothing to add or strengthen if everyone always agrees with everyone else through their own silence.

Someone says the Internet has enough useless opinions of wanna-be journalists so they themselves will only contribute sparingly (say, one blog post a year). They say they push for quality over quantity. They have the modesty to think not everything they say is genius. But, I say, what if quantity can make quality. Why can't that be a way to learn? What if I respect readers so much that I want to improve, for them? How is it modest to think what you do contribute is genius? Why can't you just say what you have to say and let others call it genius or not? Aren't two genius comments better than one? What if the quantity becomes something more than the sum of its parts?

Sometimes the world is lacking in effort. We don't all need to aim for the Forbes 500 but we all need to aim for something, and we need to know why.

Sometimes the world is lacking confidence. Confidence to say, "I disagree," "I agree" or "I have something new." Enough question dodging. Enough pleading the fifth. Enough taking both sides. If you can't agree enough with any side, make your own side and stand for something. Something that you won't let people tread on. Something that you let identify you.

Ideas are a renewable resource but the world needs more of them. Regurgitating principles is not an idea. What you are willing to sacrifice for those principles is what makes an idea. Admittedly, I don't succeed in articulating ideas every day, but I do try every day--through this blog and in life. They take the form of quips, short stories, essays, reviews, metaphors and predictions.

I daresay that remaining quiet in the hopes of not being a fool is the most foolish thing one can do. So long as they are your ideas, blended from your experiences, your thoughts are not a disease on this world. It is only when you are a mouthpiece for someone or something else that you lose yourself, your identity and your right to contribute to the world around you.

So why do I do this? Because I'm trying to say more than you're reading. And maybe, just maybe, each day you'll have more to say than you just read.