Before we begin, I'd like to share a bit of etymology on what a CMS really is, rather than just stating that it is a "Content management system".
c. 1400, literally "held or contained within limits," hence "having the desire limited to present enjoyments," from Old French content, "satisfied," from Latin contentus "contained, satisfied," past participle of continere "to hold together, enclose," from assimilated form of com "with, together" (see con-) + tenere "to hold" (from PIE root *ten- "to stretch"). Related: Contently (largely superseded by contentedly).
Content is quite literally "that which is contained" and has its etymological roots in "holding together", "enclosed", and "satisfied". It may be interesting to note that the adjective form stems from the same roots, possibly meaning that those who are "content" are satisfied with what surrounds them, and have no need to reach out beyond what is in their current reach.
1560s, probably from Italian maneggiare "to handle," especially "to control a horse," ultimately from Latin noun manus "hand" (from PIE root *man- (2) "hand"). Influenced by French manège "horsemanship" (earliest English sense was of handling horses), which also was from Italian. Extended to other objects or business from 1570s. Sense of "get by" first recorded 1650s. Related: Managed; managing. Managed economy was used by 1933.
Management has its roots in "to handle." Primarily in the context of the horse, a beast of burden, which we must break of it's natural instincts in order "to handle." So if we look at content as what is held together, management is the means to hold them together and to keep them contained as well as satisfied.
The word system has some interesting etymology. A powerful word in my opinion. This deals with organization, order, and standing/to be firm (all of which is why system is a useful replacement for the word religion in truth).
1610s, "the whole creation, the universe," from Late Latin systema "an arrangement, system," from Greek systema"organized whole, a whole compounded of parts," from stem of synistanai "to place together, organize, form in order," from syn- "together" (see syn-) + root of histanai "cause to stand," from PIE root *sta- "to stand, make or be firm.
"Meaning "set of correlated principles, facts, ideas, etc." first recorded 1630s. Meaning "animal body as an organized whole, sum of the vital processes in an organism" is recorded from 1680s; hence figurative phrase to get (something) out of one's system (1900). Computer sense of "group of related programs" is recorded from 1963. All systems go (1962) is from U.S. space program. The system "prevailing social order" is from 1806.
It's not a huge leap to say that those in the truth community are not content with what is (or was) in their reach, or rather, what was presented to them as within their reach.
Neither is it a huge leap to say that the truth community sees the current worldview as an artificial construct, built to keep us limited. We have much more room and degrees of freedom, in reality and truth. Much more is within our reach such as abundance, prosperity, and freedom.
To convince us otherwise is to convince us to live in a cage! Thus not reach our full potential even though the God is willing if only we'd reach out to know, to explore.
So who can be content with that? Who cannot be content with the truth?
And if this isn't chilling enough, there's a clear etymological relationship not stated above between management and the word "menagerie", a collection of captive animals which I imagine is related to the handling of horses and other domesticated animals.
It doesn't take a stretch of the imagination to recall your choice of a cartoon or movie theater villain from this point.
Ultimate management, the menagerie
Menagerie [link]
"collection of wild animals kept in captivity," 1712, from French ménagerie "housing for domestic animals" (16c.), from Old French manage (see menage).
Interestingly enough, menagerie has it's roots in the word "menage" from the French " ménage " which relates back to management but of a household rather than domesticated animals. This should be enough proof of some etymological relationship. Which invokes a interesting bit about Economics [link] or rather "management of the household" which James Corbett does justice with here. Ménage is also where the word "mansion" finds its roots, the homes of the fully domesticated human being (castles, or fortresses, being the homes of those who domesticate us)
Menage [link]
1690s, "management of a household, domestic establishment," from French ménage, from Old French manage"household, family dwelling" (12c.), from Vulgar Latin *mansionaticum "household, that which pertains to a house," from Latin mansionem "dwelling" (see mansion). Now generally used in suggestive borrowed phrase ménage à trois (1891), literally "household of three." Borrowed earlier as mayngnage, maynage and in the sense "members of a household, a man's household" (c. 1300); but this was obsolete by c. 1500.
All in all, I think we could look at a CMS etymologically defined as a system of control and containment. And I don't know about you, but there's enough control and containment in my life, I'd rather not add to it or make it my livelihood.
Plus, reality and truth itself, by the grace of The God, is self-controlling, self-containing and self-expanding. Who needs any more than that, except to emulate it for our own benefit?
Perhaps, those who want the control, contain and limit others?
Already, we are well on our way to understanding what a CMS better than those who've dealt with them on a subconscious level. Rather than just relying on information or experience on one or a few of the commercially available CMS's, we are diving deep into the essence of what a CMS is, The God willing.
There are few levels of experience technologists dealing with CMS's:
We are blowing right past the first two levels of experience, if not already obtained. Many people work with a commercially available CMS or two in their work history. Many of them who worked prior to the internet age of collaborative coding built their own using BBS and peers to help supplement their lack of experience. But even fewer have worked on stretching the definition of what a CMS is and even fewer challenging the idea all together.
For example, what happens when we start looking at the control and containment (management and content) as being contained in a system, thus making both "content" within this system? By making both content and management, content within a system, we lose the ability to hold things together, to keep them contained and thus we lose order and make it not worth calling a system. We would have to introduce other means of management of the content to keep things together.
I wouldn't doubt someone attempted to actually do the above, I've made several attempts myself in fact. Short of creating an abstract rules engine, one would have to rely on some management outside of the content itself.
I hope that is understandable. Just by learning the fundamental idea behind what a CMS is, we can save ourselves quite a lot of time from attempting something bound to fail.
Currently, most implementations of CMS's were built in order to manage content within a website. This is rapidly changing as we start presenting them not only as HTML but as RSS/XML, REST (Contentful), JSON (Metalsmith), mobile applications (to avoid resubmitting to the an app store for content changes) and Google AMP (a subset of HTML/CSS/JS).
Similarly, CMS's are being used to push (or feed) content to 3rd party publishers like Zapier, Facebook, Medium, Apple News.
These are interesting developments, not all CMS's are built to handle these wide ranging needs that publishers and "content creators" need in this current environment. But let's take a moment to think about what we're doing here. Ultimately, we are just pushing, feeding, and presenting content to different parties.
Queue up our villainous menagerie!
Ultimately, we are just pushing, feeding, and presenting content to different parties.
These are interesting developments and this trend is quickly moving towards a CMS for the much anticipated Internet of Thing (IoT). I've even seen implementations of a CMS to manage conference calls robots with Twilio using Umbraco CMS! [link]
For those who don't know, IoT is possibly the next step in our collective enslavement grid, along with smart grid technology, and biometric border security.
I just have to point to Max Igan for the rest on the subject of IoT control grid.
If what we've looked at so far is where we being steered towards, what remains is the question, where are we being steered away from?
Now that we've explored what CMS's today lack and what is being built on top of them to satisfy those needs, we can now instead look at what other systems qualify as a CMS but is not being called as such.
Here are a few that I can come up with:
Right now, the information being presented in this post is content for your mind to manage and organize within it's system, praise be to the God. Anywhere we go with our browsers and the information contained there, just like everything we see or hear in the world, is content for our minds and the universe.
In fact, words themselves and what they contain, or rather what it invokes in our minds of the universe (of what's contained in it) is a self-organizing, self-containing, self-expanding system! How about that for freeing our minds? Truly, glory is to The God who created such a system.
This is a work in progress. I hope we can explore a better technological implementation of a CMS antithetical to the IoT.
