This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Adeptlinguist · M
Obviously not.
He is indeed very rich but is also clueless and has extreme and obsessive objectionable views. He seems to have no self-awareness and is single-handedly destroying Twitter.
Governing and administering a country as large and complex as the US is non-trivial, and putting a simpleton who seems to believe ”if it’s government, it’s bad” in charge of “restructuring” will not end well.
Mark my words.
He is indeed very rich but is also clueless and has extreme and obsessive objectionable views. He seems to have no self-awareness and is single-handedly destroying Twitter.
Governing and administering a country as large and complex as the US is non-trivial, and putting a simpleton who seems to believe ”if it’s government, it’s bad” in charge of “restructuring” will not end well.
Mark my words.
emiliya · 22-25, F
@Adeptlinguist Some questions:
How is Musk destroying X?
What views of his are extreme and objectionable?
How is he a simpleton?
This seems to be a case of “I don't like him, so I am going to say bad things about him.” Where is your proof? Are any of these things truths or are they lies that you have not put much thought into?
How is Musk destroying X?
What views of his are extreme and objectionable?
How is he a simpleton?
This seems to be a case of “I don't like him, so I am going to say bad things about him.” Where is your proof? Are any of these things truths or are they lies that you have not put much thought into?
Adeptlinguist · M
@emiliya Well, he bought it for $44 billion and it is now worth a tiny fraction of that. User numbers are declining steeply as people abandon it in droves. Mainstream advertisers have left it. Now it’s cryptocons and drop shipping outlets.
He has shared and approved of extreme content which I and all decent people find objectionable. If you are a white supremacist, you might disagree, of course. He has also reinstated the accounts of objectively awful people such as the misogynist Andrew Tate, currently awaiting trial for people trafficking in Romania. Again, some might think Tate is not objectionable. They are wrong.
Regarding “simpleton” - did you see him jumping around on stage with Trump shouting “AAAAARRGGH”? Nuff said.
Led By Donkeys, a UK group well known for highlighting hypocrisy, have summarised all this in an excellent video, which covers the whole timeline of Musk’s destruction of Twitter. I commend it to you.
[media=https://youtu.be/iX3vMJOADlE]
He has shared and approved of extreme content which I and all decent people find objectionable. If you are a white supremacist, you might disagree, of course. He has also reinstated the accounts of objectively awful people such as the misogynist Andrew Tate, currently awaiting trial for people trafficking in Romania. Again, some might think Tate is not objectionable. They are wrong.
Regarding “simpleton” - did you see him jumping around on stage with Trump shouting “AAAAARRGGH”? Nuff said.
Led By Donkeys, a UK group well known for highlighting hypocrisy, have summarised all this in an excellent video, which covers the whole timeline of Musk’s destruction of Twitter. I commend it to you.
[media=https://youtu.be/iX3vMJOADlE]
emiliya · 22-25, F
@Adeptlinguist He is still the richest man in the world. Musk did not buy Twitter to make money or increase its value. As the video suggests at the beginning, he bought it because he wanted to rebalance the bias and make it his website. Since Musk has owned it, I have seen both the left and the right saying what they want. The left doesn't want those with views different from theirs using X and this is the reason for their continued opposition to X and to Musk. It is very transparent.
Why shouldn't Andrew Tate get to use X? Who do these liberals think they are?
Liberals leaving the site does not mean the site is being destroyed; it means there are liberals having tantrums. It's ok, you can all leave X. It will still operate and it will still be used by others.
Why shouldn't Andrew Tate get to use X? Who do these liberals think they are?
Liberals leaving the site does not mean the site is being destroyed; it means there are liberals having tantrums. It's ok, you can all leave X. It will still operate and it will still be used by others.
MartinII · 70-79, M
@Adeptlinguist Objectionable to you no doubt, but not to everyone. And if he were to destroy Twitter he would qualify for a knighthood, though of course they don't have them in the US.
Adeptlinguist · M
@MartinII You’re happy with white supremacism and Andrew Tate? Blocking you.
zonavar68 · 56-60, M
@emiliya Musk ruined Twitter by re-enabling it to be a pro-hatespeech platform - basically another vehicle for the 'God and Guns' Truth Social crowd. To be fair he was basically forced to go through with the deal to buy it because he's agreed on binding terms then attempted to back away. Musk got rid of the founders of Tesla and paints it like he created the company. Musk will just be a puppet to Trump once Trump is sworn in.
Confined · 56-60, M
@Adeptlinguist FREE SPEECH in cludes speech you do not agree with. The first admendment allowes any one to say anything. You have an illusion that some violent content was allowed. He allowed all view points and I understand he put fact checking on a lot of posts. I object any one trying to stop free speech in any way shape or form. The first admendment was included in the constitution for a reason. Biden and Harris made a promise to get rid of the constitution so they could end free speech and the second admendent and the bill or rights. Thanks to Must they will soon be out of office.
Adeptlinguist · M
@Confined You may wish to ponder why “free speech absolutist” Musk suppresses speech he does not like.
Please point me to the commitments you claim were made by Biden and Harris.
Please point me to the commitments you claim were made by Biden and Harris.