My father is convinced Elon is an idealist but I’d like to show him he’s been misled
As for your original question: Musk helps oppressive states enforce censorship on his platform .
His passion for free speech is only for white supremacists and conspiracy theorists now running rampant on his platform (there is a John Oliver segment about it).
He opposed an anti-hate-speech law in Ireland, although the law makes clear that it is still allowed to express unfavorable opinions and offend others, but forbids incitement to violence.
This shows he is not interested in defending “unfavorable reasoning” against the “woke” inquisitors, rather than advancing hate-speech and white supremacist causes in particular. This is not only a hypothesis, but a reported outcome of his actions with X/Twitter, which is now a nazi bar.
Don’t forget Russel’s tolerance paradox: If you tolerate nazis in order to defend freedom (of speech, political association, and the like), they will overtake the state apparatus and verbot freedoms for everyone, not only speech, but freedom of life as well.
He is doing exactly that, not only permitting, but promoting white supremacy, and at the same time treating the term “cisgender” for example as a slur.
This shows he is not all in for defending free-speech for all sides, but he is out to “destroy to woke mind virus” because it “stole his son from him”.
Musk is a nazi apologist, a big cry baby, and a media gatekeeper who enforces censorship both as a platform owner and as a service to totalitarian states.
He is a national security risk, according to Wired.
He is a national security risk, according to Wired.
He is a member of the national security state. He and the security state are deeply in bed with each other. Much of his income is from the military-intelligence-industrial complex, coming straight from the federal government. The US is an oligarchy, and he is one of the most powerful & influential oligarchs. He’s literally the richest person on earth at the moment, and already has enormous influence on the state.
Why did he buy Twitter? To control the conversation, to manage public opinion. He bought it to 1) censor it and 2) inject propaganda into it.
Very good point indeed.
you would have received more relevant responses if you had titled your post as, “there is absolutely no evidence that musk is against free speech. what are you folks on about, anyway?”
You might be true, Though I wanted thought out answers rather than rage bait
I wouldn’t bother. People who arrive at any opinion without using logic can’t be reasoned out of that opinion using logic. It’s an emotional thing.
The more useful framing might be someone like Ford.
I’d be hard pressed to argue Musk hasn’t had some sort of a hand in a couple significant technological movements (Tesla, SpaceX) but that doesn’t make his political positions worthy of respect.
Similarly, for all his flaws, Ford revolutionized the factory. That didn’t make his Brazilian city work, his shitty anti semetic views right or his “meh” attitudes on ww2 correct.
Musk’s successes don’t particularly quality him on everything.
In a society that values money above everything else, his status as richest person for lots of people makes his views seem relevant, even if unconsciously so. Then there come the fanboys to idolize him. But let’s consider the obsession with wealth that creates this halo effect even in the “non-fan-boys”. Musk, Trump, Tate, should all be irrelevant, but they’re not, which is in fact a systemic problem.
This man likely wants to be president, but cannot, so he’s riding the Trump train instead. As such, I suspect you can find him bending on free speech and leaning into incitement of more Jan 6 treason quite a bit in regards to that personal motive.
Exhibit A: Reality.
So you have a belief about Elon Musk, which you need to convince your father of.
But you don’t have any evidence or proof for this belief.
Does this raise any epistemic alarms in your head at all? Like … how did you form this belief?
Moving to antipolar stance requires way more proofs than moving from a neutral stance. Moreover some people may be more informed than me and they could be useful
I’m saying: how did you get convinced, if not with evidence?
Personally, I don’t memorise facts about people I don’t like. I learn them and forget them but don’t forget that I don’t like that person.
I have evidence, but needed more
A sea lion gave it to me
