One of the most amusing categories of incident during Twitter's long reign as a tool of propaganda for the regime was the slow but steady stream of academic "studies" that "proved" Twitter did not "discriminate" against the right.
There are some indications Musk may not be as self-made, independent, or "good" as he might appear at first glance. There are DOD connections with starlink, and Musk was, at a minimum, most certainly a beneficiary of Obama green energy deals. I find his technocratic vision (and the fundamental assumptions about humanity on which those are based) to be downright frightening and dystopian, such as the neurolink project. Details of his personal life leave the impression he is a moral reprobate who is attracted to darkness. He is a WEF young global leader. All of this to say, there seems to be a lot more to Musk than meets the eye, and there is something about his rise and the character and origins of many of his projects that seem unnatural and inorganic - in the sense that many of the ideas seem to originate from a silent but very well funded, independent, and preexisting R&D enterprise, benefit from shadowy funding and behind the scenes regulatory string-pulling, and market manipulation (the market value of Tesla is indefensible). These are just impressions, not well researched, and could be wrong. But they are also based on impressions from actual events and news stories (thus not entirely made up), and I am comfortable they are also not based on envy or desire to denigrate his success. Instead, I just can't shake this intuitive-sense there is a silent helper that influences the general market conditions in many ways that ensures Musk products are wildly successful. Perhaps its as simple as Musk having a keen eye for going after industries that he knows the government is motivated to have succeed (such as green energy), but the meteoric rise in his net worth during lockdowns defies logic. Amazon / Bezos made sense, but Tesla?
Anyway, with all that in mind, I view the Twitter take-over with suspicion. There are some signs this could be a type of controlled opposition (he didn't simply reach into his pocket and pull out $50 billion - it was a leveraged buyout) or trojan horse (Twitter got so out of hand and had become so blatant with its various misdeeds that I started to wonder if it was merely a sign of world-class hubris, or a purposefully executed "problem" proliferating in plain sight so that the right would openly welcome a solution that involves a digital ID, because that appears to be part of the solution. Musk has plainly stated in recent Tweets that he plans to eliminate all bots and "authenticate all humans" (his term, not mine). What else could that be except for digital ID.)
I'm 50-50 on Musk as a whole.
There are some indications Musk may not be as self-made, independent, or "good" as he might appear at first glance. There are DOD connections with starlink, and Musk was, at a minimum, most certainly a beneficiary of Obama green energy deals. I find his technocratic vision (and the fundamental assumptions about humanity on which those are based) to be downright frightening and dystopian, such as the neurolink project. Details of his personal life leave the impression he is a moral reprobate who is attracted to darkness. He is a WEF young global leader. All of this to say, there seems to be a lot more to Musk than meets the eye, and there is something about his rise and the character and origins of many of his projects that seem unnatural and inorganic - in the sense that many of the ideas seem to originate from a silent but very well funded, independent, and preexisting R&D enterprise, benefit from shadowy funding and behind the scenes regulatory string-pulling, and market manipulation (the market value of Tesla is indefensible). These are just impressions, not well researched, and could be wrong. But they are also based on impressions from actual events and news stories (thus not entirely made up), and I am comfortable they are also not based on envy or desire to denigrate his success. Instead, I just can't shake this intuitive-sense there is a silent helper that influences the general market conditions in many ways that ensures Musk products are wildly successful. Perhaps its as simple as Musk having a keen eye for going after industries that he knows the government is motivated to have succeed (such as green energy), but the meteoric rise in his net worth during lockdowns defies logic. Amazon / Bezos made sense, but Tesla?
Anyway, with all that in mind, I view the Twitter take-over with suspicion. There are some signs this could be a type of controlled opposition (he didn't simply reach into his pocket and pull out $50 billion - it was a leveraged buyout) or trojan horse (Twitter got so out of hand and had become so blatant with its various misdeeds that I started to wonder if it was merely a sign of world-class hubris, or a purposefully executed "problem" proliferating in plain sight so that the right would openly welcome a solution that involves a digital ID, because that appears to be part of the solution. Musk has plainly stated in recent Tweets that he plans to eliminate all bots and "authenticate all humans" (his term, not mine). What else could that be except for digital ID.)
Well said, very much my take too