Why can we as humans, identify when somethings are wrong, but do nothing to fix them?
Let me rephrase. Why are we able to point out weak legal, economical, or societal structures, but do little to correct them?
After all, the purpose of identifying a problem, is to solve it, isn't it?
An answer which makes sense to me is; humans are most times satisfied with weak structures. What do I mean by this? Weak structures and societies, are easier to take advantage of and exploit. These problems, exist for a constantly, because they are of benefit to a certain group of people. For example, a weak legal system makes it easier for people to be cheated and stolen from. When justice is difficult to attain, criminals become bolder.
Let's use the Nigerian society as a case study. It is so often that we speak on the ever present and infamous corruption prevalent in the society. But it seems like the more we speak and condemn it, the worse it becomes. Can we say it is because corruption is so indestructible, that all efforts to kill it fail? I for one, think that the reason is that - corruption favours some people, and those people obstruct whatever attempts are made to eliminate it.
Let's also consider the Nigerian creative industry. The lack of structure, and legal organization, makes it easy for companies to take advantage of creatives. Or for creatives to take advantage of fellow creatives. A lot of musicians, actors, filmmakers, are constantly being ripped off; as there is no solid structure to protect them. And all efforts to set in place these structures, are met with stiff opposition from fellow industry persons, who use the opportunity to exploit others.
In a nutshell, it is correct to state that the biggest hindrance to development and positive change, is from the people who need it. This isn't exactly exclusive to this side of the world though. Even in the developed nations, there are people who make it their duty to preserve the fire that would be better extinguished.
GUARDIANS OF THE WRONG
ByJefferson Nnadiekwe•4 plays
0:00 /
0:00
|
I know you like my insights đ. Kindly consider leaving a tip.
At the end of each month, we give out cash prizes to 5 people with the best insights in the past month
as well as coupon points to 15 people who didn't make the top 5, but shared high-quality content.
The winners are NOT picked from the leaderboards/rankings, we choose winners based on the quality, originality
and insightfulness of their content.
Here are a few other things to know
1
Quality over Quantity — You stand a higher chance of winning by publishing a few really good insights across the entire month,
rather than a lot of low-quality, spammy posts.
2
Share original, authentic, and engaging content that clearly reflects your voice, thoughts, and opinions.
3
Avoid using AI to generate contentâuse it instead to correct grammar, improve flow, enhance structure, and boost clarity.
4
Explore audio contentâhigh-quality audio insights can significantly boost your chances of standing out.
5
Use eye-catching cover imagesâif your content doesn't attract attention, it's less likely to be read or engaged with.
6
Share your content in your social circles to build engagement around it.
Contributor Rankings
The Contributor Rankings shows the Top 20 Contributors on TwoCents a monthly and all-time basis.
The all-time ranking is based on the Contributor Score, which is a measure of all the engagement and exposure a contributor's content receives.
The monthly score sums the score on all your insights in the past 30 days. The monthly and all-time scores are calcuated DIFFERENTLY.
This page also shows the top engagers on TwoCents — these are community members that have engaged the most with other user's content.
Contributor Score
Here is a list of metrics that are used to calcuate your contributor score, arranged from
the metric with the highest weighting, to the one with the lowest weighting.
4
Comments (excluding replies)
5
Upvotes
6
Views
1
Number of insights published
2
Subscriptions received
3
Tips received
Below is a list of badges on TwoCents and their designations.
Comments