Elon is writing a book where the protagonist Xitler was sent back in time to stop Xews from bringing about Armageddon. Its called the aXis of Timelers
I think it’ll actually be Xarmageddon, which is like Armageddon, but much more woke.
I’m surprised he hasn’t changed his name to Elon Mux by now.
He could go with Exon and then buy the company, or maybe sue them for having his name,
Lol, I love that name for him. If I don’t forget all about it, I’m gonna start using that.
deleted by creator
i thought you were referring to pooh as “xitler”, lol
No, that’s Xinnie the Pooh.
I haven’t actually seen what he agreed with…did the person he agree with actually say that?
Yup
Do you have a screenshot of the tweet he agreed with? People keep talking about it and saying that it was bigoted against jewish folks, but no one has actually said what was said or shown it.
I just follow cat and dog accounts on twitter and almost never post anything.
I know this is just a meme, but mini rant time here.
“Free speech” literally just means the government can’t arrest, censor, or penalize you for just for the things you express. Of course, there are exceptions for public safety, fraud, etc…
If Musk loses advertising revenue, that is the advertisers exercising their free speech in a free market, and deciding who they associate with.
These crybabies like Musk are upset at having consequences, and throwing a tantrum about their freedom of speech is an intentional red herring and attempt to recontextualize reality so they end up being the victim of some ephemeral bully.
The richest and most powerful people on the planet are not being persecuted.
They are just not used to being called out on their bullshit and are too weak and immature to accept being told they are wrong sometimes.
They don’t want free speech they want to force your eyes and ears open, strap you to the chair and shout all the things they wanna say to you 24/7 also you’re not allowed to do anything but agree.
Nail on the head
«Me plugging my ears as I walk by crazy right wing protestors»
“Ahhh! You’re not listening to me! You’re not respecting my freedom of speech! And if you tell your friends that I’m an asshole and to avoid my ramblings, then you hate free speech!”
Allowing someone to post mean tweets isn’t like that.
You don’t have to click on their profile. So the metaphor of you having to physically walk past them doesn’t apply. You can choose to not see them if they have a platform online.
What every social media platform is doing is censorship. Anything they don’t agree with, even if it turns out to be right a few years down the line gets removed with no due-process and no oversight, by people that are accountable to no one, that no one knows the names of.
This isn’t about that though. This is advertiser’s going “we don’t want to advertise on X because Elon promotes content we don’t agree with” and then Elon freaking out because much free speech. Even though no one is blocking or removing what he says, they just no longer want to be associated with it.
I think people in general are leaving twitter because it just sucks. Even before StinkyElon bought it, it was getting really shitty.
What’s currently happening is that advertisers are pulling their ads from X/Twitter because Elon replied “This is the full truth” to a neonazi posting the Jewish question. I think if this is censorship, it’s a form I agree with. What advertiser wants to be associated with nazis?
That’s not censorship. That is literally just capitalism. You usually don’t want your brand associated with Nazis, as that can be bad for business. Companies don’t have morals, but they care about money.
I mean yeah this guy is some sort of narcissistic of something. You won’t see him self reflecting.
deleted by creator
I read the chain of tweets. I must have missed the “Hitler was right” comment?
You’re right; he didn’t specifically say that. He called a Twitter post that said Jewish people hate white people was “so right.” And that’s a big Neonazi thing.
So… he didn’t say Hitler was right, just that a major Nazi tenet is.
I didn’t. If anyone passing through has a link to it, I’d like to check.
If I remember correctly, the Gizmodo story on this thing had a link directly to Musk’s tweet, and from there you can see the conversation he was responding to.
I honestly dont understand why anyone cares about or how twitter would lose funding. It feels so masturbatory to say you just want elons stuff to fail just because dont like him as a person which is also weird to me 🤷
This is a really lame perspective you have. If Musk was a country he’d be the 50th wealthiest country in the world.
Wanting to see someone with that much power lose as much as of that power as possible is socially responsible imo. Trying to minimize the opinion of people who are pissed at him using his power to signal boost hate speech as “just because they don’t like him” is a really fucking empty headed dumb fuck analysis.
Wanting to see someone with that much power lose as much as of that power as possible is socially responsible imo.
Okay. Whatever you tell yourself to justify being pointlessly hateful.
Pointlessly hateful? LMAO.
My point is about the consolidation of wealth and the ultra rich hoarding that much wealth/power is bad for society.
I think Musk should have to had to pay so much in taxes he should worth, only, 50 billion dollars. If you call that “hate” you should learn about what hate actually is. Clown.
I have a feeling you dont know how musk or most of these billionaires have so much money. When he purchased twitter, he sold Tesla stock to get the required funds. He paid $11 billion in taxes on the sold shares. He is just playing the game with the rules he is given. But yeah, you are coming off as a hater.
You’re coming off as a simp. I’d rather be a hater.
Oh my fucking god, I cannot stand it anymore… I think I must’ve become a simp at some point recently because every time I look at elon I just get a massive fucking erection. His face looks like it was hand designed by a thousand angels… And he has an uttermost beautiful style of clothing as well, if he happens to have a twitch account, I hope he would add me at xXPussy_Destroyrr69420wholesomekeanuchungussub2pewdiepieXx. I promise I’ll donate every cent that I make every month, I usually just mow lawns for my elderly neighbor, Mrs. Anderson, but I swear I can do so much more! I’ll probably get a job at Burger King since you get very delicious lunch breaks there!! And I’ll make he is the happiest girl in this green earth, you are so extremely beautiful it pains me to know I can’t be on that bed with you… And people say you can’t be a respectful man these days, well, as a brony, anime lover and gamer 4 life who definitely enjoys his time, I can assure you I’ll be able to show Elon what a REAL man can do. Please baby I love u Elon. I also do Fedora tricks.
Thou doth protest too much.
Put another way, the opposite of love is not hate, it’s indifference.
“I have a feeling you dont know how musk or most of these billionaires have so much money. When he purchased twitter, he sold Tesla stock to get the required funds.”
Musk used money his father made from apartheid era south Africa to go to Canada so he can dodge mandatory military service. Then he started a company that was half of a good idea. He merged companies with another conservative ghoul named Peter Theil to form paypal and sold it. Then he invested in a bunch of green energy start ups to take advantage of Obama era policies to jump start the industry AKA welfare for the rich.
“He paid $11 billion in taxes on the sold shares. He is just playing the game with the rules he is given. But yeah, you are coming off as a hater.”
Musk paid a 25% tax rate on on 44 billion dollars… boo fucking hoo. You billionaire apologist dipshits are the most pathetic fucking dumb fucks I can imagine. Wipe Elons cum off your fucking chin and think of something more substantive than “people being haters” goofy removed ass mother fucker.
Cool beans
I just love it when rich people don’t get their way, despite throwing tons of money at it.
It is kind of my fetish.
On one hand I agree schadenfreude is a dangerous thing that one should be careful about how they engage in
On the other hand he wields a LOT of power over our discussions as a society because he owns a successful platform. If twitter fails it takes away some of his power to be a shithead and to shape our discussions in a way that sucks (ie, inviting everyone to be bigots and to be cruel to their fellow humans on a scale that’s frankly kinda horrifying)
People do hate free speech though.
Nah free speech means the government won’t stop you. It doesn’t mean we gotta listen to you or give you a platform for the hate whether it’s irl or online. Gotta read that first ammendment a bit more throughly my dude
Lol cracks me up that there are people out there thinking free speech means people have to pay them advertising money no matter what you say.
I mean let’s be real, to 90% of these right wing nuts “freedom of speech” really just means “freedom to force other private parties to support, amplify, and endorse MY speech as I stifle the speech of those who disagree.”
You misread me, first ammendment protects you from the govt, not from others refusing to listen to you. Man you’re dense
They’re in agreement with you I believe ^^^
Ironic that you said they misread you…lol
Haha I’m guessing he was just in an argumentative mood and assumed all replies would be fighting with him. Sometimes that adrenaline kicks in when you see an Inbox notification.
Why does a foreign country have the absolute say on a principle/ ideology/ human right whatever you want to call it?
It doesn’t make sense. Are you telling me the ideology of freedom of speech only existed and only continues to exist because it is on a bit of paper written in a far away land?
Removed by mod
Oh look a leftist using sexual imagery as an insult. What a surprise.
Is…is that all?
Did you get triggered because of an analogy?
Replace fellating with whatever synonym floats your puritanical boat brother. Nothing wrong with fellating dong but I don’t see the win in pleasuring fascists or otherwise awful people be it literally or figuratively
People can hate or love whatever that bit of paper is.
But freedom of speech (the meaning of those words not some law) is not something most of the world likes.
The principal meme is that the bottom text is incorrect. He is wrong.
But he isn’t wrong people do hate freedom of speech.
The meaning of those words is absolutely some law, whether natural or governmental, and depends entirely upon the context of the power structure involved.
If you got slapped in your goofy ass face every time you said, well let me just pull up a real, actual quote from you:
"Women do not want to help men but they expect help from them.
That doesn’t make me miserable that’s just accepting the world the way it is and it’s a life lesson men tend to learn the hard way."
If they slapped your extremely goofy, unserious face and called you a generalizing, pathetic, and small person, that wouldn’t be them hating free speech.
Hell, they’d be exercising it! How wonderful!
Now, if the government came to your door and impounded your 4 wheel drive incompetence with relationships, then you might have a victorious day in court.
Freedom to assault and freedom of speech are two different things.
I respect your right to say I got a goofy ass face and generalizing, pathetic, and small person. I’m truly happy you are able to do that. I just don’t think you disagreeing with me gives you the right to assault me.
Obviously that thread was full of generalisations and that wasn’t a all women situation it was more about the everyday occurances of everday men. It was written like that for simplicity rather than needed to and “not all but a lot of” every 5 seconds. Still stand by the spirit if that point, which was the important thing.
Uh yes actually if you physically strike a person when they say something you find “pathetic”, or any other adjective, you are in fact against free speech.
No that’s excercising freedom expression. You are free from persecution from the government, not ostracization socially. Nazis should be punched, not protected. There’s no such thing as free speech for Nazis. Same thing in this case, you say bullshit, people are “free” to react how they will to it.
See? You just totally abdicated any responsibility to allow others to speak. Why would you be so concerned with making sure it’s only government which has that responsibility, if you didn’t hate free speech?
responsibility to allow others to speak
Yeah not gonna gaslight me, buddy. It’s not my obligation to give anyone a platform for anything. Try again.
Responsibility can only be taken, not given. So yeah, if you say that’s not your responsibility, then it’s not your responsibility. But choosing not to adopt that responsibility does indeed make you a hater of free speech.
I guess I hate free speech, too, because I’m blocking you now. Die mad about it.
I’m just curious if I can still reply, when you’ve blocked me.
I probably won’t. I don’t even know who you are.
I don’t hate free speech. There’s just nothing saying I HAVE to listen to someone spewing hate and misinformation. Especially all the hate and misinformation that’s put me in danger for years because of me being queer or neurodivergent.
There’s nothing saying I HAVE to listen to someone spewing hate and misinformation
Except for the concept of being open minded. The ethical imperative to face new information that’s not easy to process, so that you can respond to it instead of being blindsided by it.
Free speech is a responsibility held by all members of society, to maintain those channels of communication.
Just like a good general has a responsibility to hear emissaries of his enemy, no matter how bitterly hated that enemy is. There’s nothing that says he HAS to listen to that emissary … other than his responsibility to his troops.
Except when that is hate towards me for being queer or neurodivergent. I can and will block out hate speech towards me or other minorities that’s not based in reality. There’s a point where I will listen except when vitriol is spewed towards me for no reason. You’re attaching a tolerance to intolerance as if we have to listen to n@!is, racists or bigots just attacking everyone else for no good reason other than fox or Trump telling them so that these minorities are some threat that they’re not.
“Responsibility to allow”…?
Take a step back and consider how stupid that sounds. The onus isn’t on others while you say stupid shit.
I mean consider even now… I’m not infringing on your free speech by telling you what you just said was misguided at best and as stupid as it sounds at worst.
You still got to say what you want. You can say it again too. Still sounds stupid the second time.
The reality is this isn’t about a person’s ability to say something so much as their bullshit argument.
When someone says “but I have the right!” what they’re really saying is they aren’t intelligent enough to have a good reason or justification. They’re instead screaming “well just cause I can!” It’s a privileged, ill reasoned, temper tantrum of an argument that amounts to “just cause I can.”
Yes, it is. It is natural to want to try and shut people up. Resisting the urge to manipulate and control others is work. We all have a responsibility toward a healthy society.
That’s why it’s prosocial when someone steps in for a person who’s being shouted down and puts his own skin on the line to say “let him talk”.
The fact you choose not to carry that burden doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist.
It’s weird to have someone argue that when the context of all this is support of antisemitism.
Of course it’s a positive to help support the voice of someone who might have theirs oppressed. But why go to such extremes to support the oppressor?
Why do you argue that we must advocate for the oppressor? Are we not allowed the freedom to speak up against those that oppress others? Is that speech not allowed?
You see how it’s a stupid circle of inductive reasoning that does nothing to help anyone? Bottom line is a rigid absolute, a utopia is a more destructive and stupid approach than the free speech for which you claim to advocate. Freedom isn’t possible is you tolerate intolerance.
You’re free to speak. Other people are free to hate you for what you say. That’s how it works.
People do hate freedom of speech though.
A lot of people are very much against humans being free to speak their mind. They would like People to be incapable of that or they would like to be protected from it.
What you are saying no way contradicts that.
Freedom of speech isn’t freedom from consequences. If you say awful things people will use their free speech to tell you you’re an awful person. That isn’t hating free speech. It’s hating you. Hating you isn’t illegal.
Freedom of speech isn’t freedom from consequences.
Of course it is. What on earth could “free speech” possibly mean if not “you won’t be punished for what you say”?
What do you think free speech is, other than a commitment to refrain from punishing people for speaking?
Punished by a government. That’s where free speech begins and ends.
Only if you definite it to be limited to there. Free speech or the lack thereof is a condition of existence for a group of people.
If you consider the US constitution, the rule government must adhere to is to refrain from interfering with free speech.
Homie, I’m Canadian, it’s beyond the constitution of the US. We don’t have unlimited free speech because it fucking leads to genocide and violence. I will fight to the grave to ensure that tolerance only extends to the tolerant. This is what generations fought a nearly world ending world war over. It’s worth fighting over, you don’t have to agree with me.
Only if you definite it to be limited to there. Free speech or the lack thereof is a condition of existence for a group of people.
Free speech is just that the government shouldn’t be able to punish you for what you say. Nothing else.
What you describe is governed by the social contract. Noone should be forced to listen to what other people say, and people can freely decide to distance themselves if someone says something they don’t agree with.
You don’t get to change a definition just because it doesn’t suit you.
You’ve conflated punishment and consequences. You have the freedom to hold some morally repugnant view like white nationalism, and your freedom of speech protects your right to express those views. But your family can hear those expressions, and cut you out of their lives, publicly condemn those views, or you for holding them, without affecting your freedom of speech. A company can refuse to allow you to use their platform to spread those views without affecting your freedom of speech.
What can’t happen is a politician or government official use their powers to suppress your speech, arrest you, unless your speech act harms people, like shouting fire in a crowded theater. People disagree about exactly what those exceptions should be, but except for a few small but loud conservative groups trying to censor things like LGBTQ content, this basic premise is pretty uncontroversial, at least in the US.
Negative consequences deliberately chosen to discourage others from speaking up is called punishment.
I don’t agree that’s true in general, and it’s also not relevant to free speech
The government punishing people. I am not the government. I can point out that you are a fool to think you are otherwise immune from the consequences of what you say.
What in the world ever made you think that was a reasonable thing to say? Do you really believe that its your right to not only say what you want, but also never have anyone have a negative opinion of it? That is completely insane. Like actually I’m worried about your mental health. Seek help.
Dude… They’re not disliking freedom of speech, they’re disliking the contents of your speech. You’re free to say whatever the hell you want. We’re also free to call you an idiot if we’re so inclined.
Do you believe that Ben Shapiro is merely speaking his mind when tries to argue that allowing children to transition will increase the suicide rate when literally all available data about trans children shows the exact opposite? Do you believe that Steven Crowder is merely speaking his mind when he “proves” global warming is fake by showing that Antarctic ice levels are higher in October than they were the preceding August while ignoring the steady downward year-over-year trend modulated by the seasons? Do you believe that Donald Trump was merely speaking his mind when he called for his followers to march on the white house, or, more recently, called immigrants vermin?
I don’t know who those first two people are.
But speaking your mind isn’t proof of anything. The ability to speak freely is freedom of speech. I’ll support anyone that is for freedom of speech and i think everyone should have the right of freedom of speech as long as it doesnt impact someone elses freedoms.
Trump. I’m not even sure what point you are making about freedom of speech, you seem to be talking about intent not about freedom of speech. I’m not actually familiar with the point you mean.
i think everyone should have the right of freedom of speech as long as it doesnt impact someone elses freedoms.
If you are against people using their freedom of speech in an attempt to take away the rights and freedoms of other people, then I’d think you’d find that most people do support freedom of speech the way that you do.
And you in no way comprehended what he said.
When it’s propaganda and misinformation dressing up as free speech, yes.
Why are you attracted to children?
