You are, and there’s a “new post” button at the top. Or you can say “regardless of this being musk saying the original thing, can we talk about how billionaires really are just the worst?”
Coming in out of nowhere with only your own axe to grind without any of the rest of us having a concept of why you’re bringing it up just smacks of someone wanting to hate on jews, just like the original guy, which is what I originally answered of your original question.
And I’m sorry, but your non-sequitur at the end had absolutely nothing to do with how this conversation unfolded. Read it again from the top - and I don’t mean your reply to the post, but the actual post itself.
You are, and there’s a “new post” button at the top
Yeah but the comment feature makes it easy to have related discussion in one place.
It’s not a non sequitor. I assumed by the post, you meant that calling George Soros a villain makes you look like a Nazi, regardless of who you are. That’s why Elon Musk looks like a Nazi. This assumption was proven correct in your response.
So by now, the meaning behind my question is beyond being clearly established, so why do you insist on these semantic games instead of sticking to the chain of discussion?
So let’s continue. I thought I made a salient point earlier. If your standard is consistent, why are people who have similar animosity towards other jewish billionaires like the Koch brothers and Mark Zuckerburg not given the same treatment? Why are they not labelled antisemitic?
I’m sorry, but what you call “semantic games” is literally the contract of communication. Semantics are the definition of meaning, and I’m not going to let you futz around with them to try to win a little pocket war of stupidity.
If you lack the wherewithal to see that the context around a singular billionaire going ham on another singular billionaire solely because he’s the alt-right’s nonsensical boogie man, then that’s entirely your problem. When you participate in the same game that the billionaire is; to whit, an obvious nazi attack, then I’m just going to let you paint yourself with the same brush. That is YOUR doing.
I’ve laid out a number of ways you can easily criticize Soros. It’s easy: literally all billionaires are bastards. But say that appropos of nothing, not within the context of one alt-right nazifucker saying it publicly and then going “hrm, yeah now is the time to air my grievance; I’m exceedingly wise”
Let me break this down simply because this seems to be tricky for you. I’ll be patient because maybe English is not your first language, and there could be some misunderstanding there.
Look back to my first comment, “How does calling a billionaire a villain make you a nazi?”
Notice the ‘you’ in that sentence. In English, this is called the ‘generic you.’ It doesn’t mean I’m referring to you specifically dax. It means I am referring to any generic person, not anyone in particular. To suggest that this question does not pertain to the generic person but solely applies to Elon Musk and has no broader application, would be a grammatical butchering of my sentence. That interpretation of my message would be an objectively incorrect one.
So one of two things happened. You either misinterpreted the question originally and therefore began participating in a discussion that you actually had no interest in, or perhaps you always understood the question. Either way, we should be crystal clear on what my comment meant, and this is either a discussion you want to have or it’s one you do not want to have. If it’s one you do not want to have, then the kind thing would have been to drop it and move on instead of stringing me along and imposing meaning on my words that isn’t there.
It’s rude to suggest I’m not allowed a certain line of discussion. It’s an open platform, and I’m following the rules, and you are not a mod.
Moving on, since you’re adding more to the discussion:
I’ve laid out a number of ways you can easily criticize Soros. It’s easy: literally all billionaires are bastards. But say that appropos of nothing, not within the context of one alt-right nazifucker saying it publicly
But by extension you are calling George Soros a bastard in the same context. Nevermind that, my issue goes beyond just this one twitter thread. My issue is that people like to make George Soros immune from criticism. If you haven’t noticed this, I don’t know where you’ve been. Like, even if we’re talking about the Elon Musk tweets, if he were talking about another jewish billionaire like Mark Zuckerburg, would anyone bat an eye? What about the Koch brothers? I doubt it. And that’s why I think the issue people had with what Elon said is not even about him, it’s about George Soros.
This is a good observation actually. Let’s formalize this logic with induction rules:
Anyone who says something bad about George Soros -> Nazi
A billionaire says something bad about a jewish billionaire -> Not always a bad thing, depends on context
So in this case, observably the first rule is what people are applying to Elon Musk here. I have an issue with such a rule existing because it makes no sense. I guess basically I don’t have a problem with people labeling Elon Musk a nazi, I care about the steps they take to get there, because these steps could be used on other people irrationally like you have just tried to do to me. So yes, now is the correct time and context to argue this because now is the time where I see this irrational logic on display, and I will not let it go unpunished.
But by extension you are calling George Soros a bastard in the same context. Nevermind that, my issue goes beyond just this one twitter thread. My issue is that people like to make George Soros immune from criticism. If you haven’t noticed this, I don’t know where you’ve been. Like, even if we’re talking about the Elon Musk tweets, if he were talking about another jewish billionaire like Mark Zuckerburg, would anyone bat an eye? What about the Koch brothers? I doubt it. And that’s why I think the issue people had with what Elon said is not even about him, it’s about George Soros.
That’s entirely your problem, then. You’re presuming the issue with what Elon said is not about him, but about George Soros, but instead it’s yet another in a long line of reasons why Elon’s nazi-adjacent philosophies are being called out. I’m sorry you’re not coginzant of that, and I’m sorry you lack the ability to see context in the moment and think everything must be treated as a standalone issue. I’m sorry that you don’t have a firm grasp on the interplay of social zeitgeist, nazis operating in the open with disingenous remarks like yours, and I’m also sorry that you refuse to see it even after I explained it to you repeatedly.
Listen, if a Nazi is talking shit, don’t fucking pick up their shit talking because it jives with your own. Walk away. Wait. Bring it out later after the Nazis are gone and then you wont’ be tarred with the same nazi brush.
But since you’re clearly incompetent of understanding this, go ahead; pick up the nazi tar brush and tar yourself with it. That’s, again, entirely your doing. You don’t need to act like you’re winning this because there is no winning this argument. You’re just making yourself look like an absolute fool and a nazi apologist and I really don’t care to continue this conversation - for the second time. I won’t tell you a third.
I’m sorry that you don’t have a firm grasp on the interplay of social zeitgeist, nazis operating in the open with disingenous remarks like yours
Oh no I’m well aware of what you’re referring to. I just don’t find it relevant right now. I think you in your own way are unaware of the way that the online discourse on the left reacts to this. I’ve seen people who argue correctly that, yes, imperialism and neo-colonialism do in fact exist get smeared as anti-semites for some reason. Any reference to some global system of power with a powerful group of people at the top is smeared as “Nazi” because of a tenuous resemblance to Nazi conspiracy theories.
And honestly, that’s a way more serious problem to me. I think the people who are actually complicit in violence should not be able to claim the moral high ground. That’s a dangerous thing.
Listen, if a Nazi is talking shit, don’t fucking pick up their shit talking because it jives with your own. Walk away. Wait. Bring it out later after the Nazis are gone and then you wont’ be tarred with the same nazi brush.
Your brush is a pretty broad brush at this point. And that’s why no one is scared of it.
But really? I’m going to bookmark this post, wait for two weeks or so when the issue is no longer relevant, and then remember to create a new post about it? No one does that. And even if I did, you would still be responding the same way, but you would give me different reasons.
This “associated by context” rule you have is really nuts. Here’s a good example. Look at Israel and all the atrocities they commit against Palestinians. Obv there are Nazis who hate Israel for different reasons. But should I silence my criticism of Israel at a prime moment just because there are Nazis in the room? Why should I silence myself when the US government already does so much to silence BDS supporters against their rights?
You make it seem like my point of discussion is some big emergency that has to be handled carefully, with the correct equipment, and following the correct prodedures and protocol. Why? What’s the harm if I make my point? Does the reich come back? I’m genuinely curious. You realize that when real Nazis were brigading Lemmy I was the one who traced them back to their hive and exposed them right?
I really don’t care to continue this conversation - for the second time. I won’t tell you a third.
Ok well no one is forcing you to stay here. So if you keep participating, it seems like you do care actually. I told you you could leave, remember? I said
If it’s one you do not want to have, then the kind thing would have been to drop it and move on
So for the second time, you can drop it if you want. I won’t tell you a third 😡😡😡
Haha, I’m kidding. I will tell you as many times as you like. I’m generous like that.
What, so I’m not allowed to start the discussion that I want to have even if it’s related to the original topic?
Edit: By the way, there’s a difference between providing context and imposing meaning that isn’t there.
You are, and there’s a “new post” button at the top. Or you can say “regardless of this being musk saying the original thing, can we talk about how billionaires really are just the worst?”
Coming in out of nowhere with only your own axe to grind without any of the rest of us having a concept of why you’re bringing it up just smacks of someone wanting to hate on jews, just like the original guy, which is what I originally answered of your original question.
And I’m sorry, but your non-sequitur at the end had absolutely nothing to do with how this conversation unfolded. Read it again from the top - and I don’t mean your reply to the post, but the actual post itself.
Yeah but the comment feature makes it easy to have related discussion in one place.
It’s not a non sequitor. I assumed by the post, you meant that calling George Soros a villain makes you look like a Nazi, regardless of who you are. That’s why Elon Musk looks like a Nazi. This assumption was proven correct in your response.
So by now, the meaning behind my question is beyond being clearly established, so why do you insist on these semantic games instead of sticking to the chain of discussion?
So let’s continue. I thought I made a salient point earlier. If your standard is consistent, why are people who have similar animosity towards other jewish billionaires like the Koch brothers and Mark Zuckerburg not given the same treatment? Why are they not labelled antisemitic?
I’m sorry, but what you call “semantic games” is literally the contract of communication. Semantics are the definition of meaning, and I’m not going to let you futz around with them to try to win a little pocket war of stupidity.
If you lack the wherewithal to see that the context around a singular billionaire going ham on another singular billionaire solely because he’s the alt-right’s nonsensical boogie man, then that’s entirely your problem. When you participate in the same game that the billionaire is; to whit, an obvious nazi attack, then I’m just going to let you paint yourself with the same brush. That is YOUR doing.
I’ve laid out a number of ways you can easily criticize Soros. It’s easy: literally all billionaires are bastards. But say that appropos of nothing, not within the context of one alt-right nazifucker saying it publicly and then going “hrm, yeah now is the time to air my grievance; I’m exceedingly wise”
Let me break this down simply because this seems to be tricky for you. I’ll be patient because maybe English is not your first language, and there could be some misunderstanding there.
Look back to my first comment, “How does calling a billionaire a villain make you a nazi?”
Notice the ‘you’ in that sentence. In English, this is called the ‘generic you.’ It doesn’t mean I’m referring to you specifically dax. It means I am referring to any generic person, not anyone in particular. To suggest that this question does not pertain to the generic person but solely applies to Elon Musk and has no broader application, would be a grammatical butchering of my sentence. That interpretation of my message would be an objectively incorrect one.
So one of two things happened. You either misinterpreted the question originally and therefore began participating in a discussion that you actually had no interest in, or perhaps you always understood the question. Either way, we should be crystal clear on what my comment meant, and this is either a discussion you want to have or it’s one you do not want to have. If it’s one you do not want to have, then the kind thing would have been to drop it and move on instead of stringing me along and imposing meaning on my words that isn’t there.
It’s rude to suggest I’m not allowed a certain line of discussion. It’s an open platform, and I’m following the rules, and you are not a mod.
Moving on, since you’re adding more to the discussion:
But by extension you are calling George Soros a bastard in the same context. Nevermind that, my issue goes beyond just this one twitter thread. My issue is that people like to make George Soros immune from criticism. If you haven’t noticed this, I don’t know where you’ve been. Like, even if we’re talking about the Elon Musk tweets, if he were talking about another jewish billionaire like Mark Zuckerburg, would anyone bat an eye? What about the Koch brothers? I doubt it. And that’s why I think the issue people had with what Elon said is not even about him, it’s about George Soros.
This is a good observation actually. Let’s formalize this logic with induction rules:
Anyone who says something bad about George Soros -> Nazi
A billionaire says something bad about a jewish billionaire -> Not always a bad thing, depends on context
So in this case, observably the first rule is what people are applying to Elon Musk here. I have an issue with such a rule existing because it makes no sense. I guess basically I don’t have a problem with people labeling Elon Musk a nazi, I care about the steps they take to get there, because these steps could be used on other people irrationally like you have just tried to do to me. So yes, now is the correct time and context to argue this because now is the time where I see this irrational logic on display, and I will not let it go unpunished.
Takes so long for people to see my point.
That’s entirely your problem, then. You’re presuming the issue with what Elon said is not about him, but about George Soros, but instead it’s yet another in a long line of reasons why Elon’s nazi-adjacent philosophies are being called out. I’m sorry you’re not coginzant of that, and I’m sorry you lack the ability to see context in the moment and think everything must be treated as a standalone issue. I’m sorry that you don’t have a firm grasp on the interplay of social zeitgeist, nazis operating in the open with disingenous remarks like yours, and I’m also sorry that you refuse to see it even after I explained it to you repeatedly.
Listen, if a Nazi is talking shit, don’t fucking pick up their shit talking because it jives with your own. Walk away. Wait. Bring it out later after the Nazis are gone and then you wont’ be tarred with the same nazi brush.
But since you’re clearly incompetent of understanding this, go ahead; pick up the nazi tar brush and tar yourself with it. That’s, again, entirely your doing. You don’t need to act like you’re winning this because there is no winning this argument. You’re just making yourself look like an absolute fool and a nazi apologist and I really don’t care to continue this conversation - for the second time. I won’t tell you a third.
Oh no I’m well aware of what you’re referring to. I just don’t find it relevant right now. I think you in your own way are unaware of the way that the online discourse on the left reacts to this. I’ve seen people who argue correctly that, yes, imperialism and neo-colonialism do in fact exist get smeared as anti-semites for some reason. Any reference to some global system of power with a powerful group of people at the top is smeared as “Nazi” because of a tenuous resemblance to Nazi conspiracy theories.
It’s obvious the media use pearl clutching about moral issues as away to counter real criticism. I mean, OP is literally regurgitating a CNN talking point. See the opening of this article: https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/16/business/elon-musk-george-soros/index.html
And honestly, that’s a way more serious problem to me. I think the people who are actually complicit in violence should not be able to claim the moral high ground. That’s a dangerous thing.
Your brush is a pretty broad brush at this point. And that’s why no one is scared of it.
But really? I’m going to bookmark this post, wait for two weeks or so when the issue is no longer relevant, and then remember to create a new post about it? No one does that. And even if I did, you would still be responding the same way, but you would give me different reasons.
This “associated by context” rule you have is really nuts. Here’s a good example. Look at Israel and all the atrocities they commit against Palestinians. Obv there are Nazis who hate Israel for different reasons. But should I silence my criticism of Israel at a prime moment just because there are Nazis in the room? Why should I silence myself when the US government already does so much to silence BDS supporters against their rights?
You make it seem like my point of discussion is some big emergency that has to be handled carefully, with the correct equipment, and following the correct prodedures and protocol. Why? What’s the harm if I make my point? Does the reich come back? I’m genuinely curious. You realize that when real Nazis were brigading Lemmy I was the one who traced them back to their hive and exposed them right?
Ok well no one is forcing you to stay here. So if you keep participating, it seems like you do care actually. I told you you could leave, remember? I said
So for the second time, you can drop it if you want.
I won’t tell you a third 😡😡😡
Haha, I’m kidding. I will tell you as many times as you like. I’m generous like that.